Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Professional/technologist, academic, and teacher characteristics of a technological faculty Alder, Beverley Mae 1979

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1979_A8 A44.pdf [ 7.27MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0055781.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0055781-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0055781-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0055781-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0055781-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0055781-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0055781-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0055781-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0055781.ris

Full Text

PROFESSIONAL/TECHNOLOGIST, ACADEMIC, AND TEACHER CHARACTERISTICS OF A TECHNOLOGICAL FACULTY by BEVERLEY MAE ALDER B.S.N., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1968 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Higher Education We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA August, 1979 (c\ Beverley Mae Alder, 1979 MASTER OF ARTS in I n p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r an a d v a n c e d d e g r e e a t t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a , I a g r e e t h a t t h e L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e a n d s t u d y . I f u r t h e r a g r e e t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y p u r p o s e s may be g r a n t e d by t h e Head o f my D e p a r t m e n t o r by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g o r p u b l i c a t i o n o f t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l g a i n s h a l l n o t be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . D e p a r t m e n t .Of Higher Education The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a 2075 W e s b r o o k P l a c e V a n c o u v e r , C a n a d a V6T 1W5 D a t e August 14, 1979 DE-6 BP 75-51 1 E ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to determine the professional/techno-l o g i s t , academic, and teacher characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s of the faculty of a technological i n s t i t u t e located i n Canada. Three areas were investigated: (1) the actual characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s of the faculty groups (core, business, engineering, and health) as provided by the faculty; (2) the characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s perceived as desirable for faculty as indicated by the faculty groups and adminis-trators; and (3) the congruence between the "actual" and "desirable" characteristics within each faculty group. The data were obtained from self-administered questionnaires given to a l l of the fu l l - t i m e faculty and administrators involved i n two and three year technological programs. Descriptive data i n the.form of percentages were obtained, and where possible, i n f e r e n t i a l s t a t i s t i c s using one way analysis of variance were performed. Differences were noted i n the.actual characteristics of the faculty groups. In comparison to the other groups, core faculty had proportion-ately fewer members who had 11 years or more work experience and "basic" professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n . Fewer members of the core and health f a c u l t i e s had engaged i n consulting or "part-time" work, and taken an inservice teaching preparation course than had the other two groups. Core and health f a c u l t i e s spent s i g n i f i c a n t l y less time i n professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s than did the other two f a c u l t i e s . Compared to the business and engineering f a c u l t i e s , health faculty spent s i g n i f i c a n t l y more time performing teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s . i i i The faculty groups and administrators indicated-dlfferences i n the characteristics they considered to be "desirable" for faculty. Compared to the other faculty groups and the administrators, the health faculty showed the smallest percentage who thought that no education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n was needed for faculty. Health faculty had s i g n i f i c a n t differences from the other groups as health faculty considered various instruction or education topics to be more "useful." Core faculty differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y from the engineering and administrators groups as the former considered an educational leave of absence as more "useful." Business faculty showed a s i g n i f i c a n t difference from the health faculty i n that the/business faculty considered consulting a c t i v i t i e s as more "useful." Differences were found between the^characteristics the faculty groups actually possessed and the characteristics they considered to be desirable. Although 3 to 5 years of previous work experience was generally considered as desirable by a l l faculty groups, fewer members of each group actually had that amount. The majority of a l l faculty groups considered consulting from 1 to 20 percent of the_:time worked per week as desirable. However, considerably fewer members of each group actually consulted for that amount of time. A bachelor degree was the modal minimal academic credential desired; however, generally fewer members of a l l faculty groups actually had that as thei r highest attainment. Although the majority of a l l faculty groups considered research a c t i v i t i e s to be "very valuable" or "valuable", the minority of a l l groups "very often" or "frequently" engaged i n such a c t i v i t i e s . The largest proportions of ..all groups considered 1 to 2 years i v of previous teaching experience as desirable; i n contrast, considerably smaller proportions actually had such experience. A l l faculty groups "actually" spent more time performing teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s , and less time performing academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s and professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s , than they thought they "should" spend. These findings imply that: '...technological faculty should not be perceived as i d e n t i c a l i n the characteristics they actually possess; faculty groups and administrators should not be perceived as i d e n t i c a l i n the characteristics they perceive as desirable for technological faculty; and technological faculty groups should not be thought of as being i n congruence with the i r "actual" and "desired" characteristics. These findings suggest that the four faculty groups should be involved i n the assessment of the usefulness and/or value of new faculty development programs before they are implemented. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE ABSTRACT i i TABLE OF CONTENTS v LIST OF TABLES v ± L i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS x i I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 1 Background of the Problem 1 Statement of the Problem 3 Methodology 3 Description of Technological I n s t i t u t e Selected for Study 4 De f i n i t i o n of Terms 6 Hypotheses 7 Importance of the Study 7 Organization of the Thesis 9 I I REVIEW OF SELECTED RELATED LITERATURE 10 Literature Related to the De f i n i t i o n of Technological Education and Inst i t u t i o n s Providing I t 10 Selected Literature Related to the Characteristics, Attributes, and A c t i v i t i e s of Faculty Teaching i n Technological Programs 15 The calendar as a source of actual q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of teaching faculty 15 Research on technological faculty 16 Personal communications on technological faculty ' 20 Selected publications . 22 Summary 24 v i I I I RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 25 Introduction 25 Questionnaire Content 26 Organization of the Questionnaires 28 Format of the Questions 29 P i l o t testing 30 Selection of the Sample . 30 Data Collection Procedures 32 Data Analyses 33 Summary 35 IV FINDINGS 36 Introduction 36 Response Rates and Demographic Information 36 Age 38 Gender 39 Description of Faculty i n Professional/Technologist, Academic, and Teacher Dimensions 39 Professional or technologist i d e n t i t y 39 Academic ide n t i t y 47 Teacher i d e n t i t y 50 Composite of the three i d e n t i t y dimensions 54 "Desirable" Characteristics and A c t i v i t i e s for Faculty as Perceived by Faculty Groups and Administrators 57 Professional or technologist i d e n t i t y 57 Academic ide n t i t y 64 Teacher i d e n t i t y 68 Composite of the three i d e n t i t y dimensions 74 Comparison of Faculty Groups' Actual and Perceived "Desirable" Characteristics . .' . . . 77 Professional or technologist i d e n t i t y 77 Academic i d e n t i t y 82 Teacher i d e n t i t y 85 Composite of the three i d e n t i t y dimensions 89 V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 91 Summary 91 Limitations i 92 Conclusions, Summary of Differences, and Implications 93 Recommendations for Research 100 v i i SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 102 APPENDICES A LIST OF ITEMS AND SUPPORTING RATIONALE FOR IDENTITY DIMENSIONS 106 B QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE FACULTY GROUPS 110 C QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE ADMINISTRATORS . 123 D COVERING AND FOLLOW-UP LETTERS FOR THE FACULTY . . 130 E COVERING AND FOLLOW-UP LETTERS FOR THE ADMINISTRATORS 132 VITA v i i i LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1 Canadian Educational Institutions Named Institutes of Technology 13 2 Names and Locations of Institutions i n Canada Appearing to Specialize i n One Technology 14 3 Numbers of Faculty for Each Division 31 4 Response Rates for Questionnaires by Groups 37 5 Gender of Groups i n Percentages 39 6 Previous Work Experiences i n the D i s c i p l i n e or Technology Currently Taught by Faculty Groups i n Percentages 40 7 Highest Level of Technological or Professional C e r t i f i c a t i o n by Percentages of Faculty Groups . . . . 41 8 Short Term Professional Upgrading A c t i v i t i e s : Percentages of Faculty Groups 43 9 Long Term Professional Upgrading or Broadening A c t i v i t i e s : Percentages of Faculty Groups 45 10 Usual Ways Faculty Keep i n Contact with Their Profession or Technology 46 11 Percentage of Time Worked Per Week i n Consulting by Faculty Groups 47 12 Academic Credentials of Faculty Groups 48 13 Frequency of Research A c t i v i t i e s of Faculty Groups . . . . 49 14 Level and Amount of Previous Teaching Experience of Faculty Groups i n Percentages 51 15 Topics Taken i n Credit Courses i n Instruction by Faculty Groups i n Percentages 52 16 Assistance Received by Faculty Groups i n Teaching Preparation and Instruction 53 17 Highest Level of Education or Teaching C e r t i f i c a t i o n of Faculty i n Percentages 54 i x 18 Means and Standard Deviations: Actual Percentage of Time Spent i n Teaching, Academic, and Professional or Technologist A c t i v i t i e s by Faculty Groups 55 19 One Way Analysis of Variance: Actual Percentage of Time Spent i n Teaching, Academic, and Pro-fessional or Technologist A c t i v i t i e s by Faculty Groups 56 20 Amounts of Work Experience Related to the Technology or Courses Taught Perceived as Most Desirable for Newly Hired Faculty 58 21 Minimal Level of Professional or Technological C e r t i f i c a t i o n Desirable for Faculty 59 22 Means and Standard Deviations: Technologist/ Professional Characteristics and A c t i v i t i e s 60 23 Multivariate Analysis of Variance: Technologist/ Professional Characteristics and A c t i v i t i e s 61 24 Consulting or Part-Time Work: Percentage of Time Worked Per Week Perceived as Desirable for Faculty . .. i 65 25 Minimal Desirable Educational Attainment by Faculty Groups and Administrators 66 26 Means and Standard Deviations: Value of Research A c t i v i t i e s by Faculty Groups and Administrators . . . . 67 27 Univariate Analysis of Variance: Value of Research A c t i v i t i e s by Faculty Groups and Administrators . . . . 67 28 Amounts of Teaching Experience Perceived Desirable for Faculty 69 29 Means and Standard Deviations: Desirable Teaching Characteristics and A c t i v i t i e s by Faculty Groups and Administrators 70 30 Multivariate Analysis of Variance: Desirable Teaching Characteristics and A c t i v i t i e s by Faculty Groups and Administrators 71 31 Lowest Level of Education or Teaching C e r t i f i c a t i o n or Licencing Desirable for Faculty 75 X 32 Means and Standard Deviations for Percentage of Time Faculty Should Spend i n Teaching, Academic, and Professional/Technologist A c t i v i t i e s by Faculty Groups and Administrators 76 33 One Way Analysis of Variance: Percentage of Time Faculty Should Spend i n Teaching, Academic, and Professional/Technologist A c t i v i t i e s by Faculty Groups and Administrators . 76 34 Actual and Desired Extent of Work Experience Related to the Technology or Courses Taught of Newly Hired Faculty 7 8 35 Actual and Desired Levels of Technological or Professional C e r t i f i c a t i o n for Faculty 79 36 Actual and Desirable Percentage of Time Worked Per Week Spent i n Consulting or Part-Time Work 81 37 Educational Attainment: Highest Possessed and Minimal Desirable Attainment 84 38 Frequency and Value of Research A c t i v i t i e s for Faculty 85 39 Actual and Desirable Prio r Teaching Experience for Faculty 86 40 Education or Teaching C e r t i f i c a t i o n : Highest Possessed and Minimal Desirable Level 87 41 Mean Percentages of Actual and Desired Time Worked i n Teaching, Academic, and Professional/ Technologist A c t i v i t i e s 89 x i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am grateful for the support, encouragement, and assistance of many people while undertaking this study. I would especially l i k e to thank the following people: Dr. John D. Dennison, chairperson of my Thesis Committee, gave me the needed encouragement to follow through with t h i s study. His guidance and timely helpfulness were much appreciated. Other members of my Thesis Committee were Drs. Rogers, Echols, and Bakan. Dr. Rogers provided valuable assistance with the analysis and presentation of data. I am thankful to Dr. Echols for his suggestions and to Dr. Bakan for her encouragement. Ms. Sonia Williams, Health Continuing Education Co-ordinator of the Continuing Education Department at the Ins t i t u t e studied, gave me invaluable assistance with constructing the questionnaires. I am thankful to my husband, Donald Alder, for his support, suggestions, and constructive c r i t i c i s m . I am grateful to a l l the faculty members and administrators who di l i n g e n t l y completed questionnaires and made i t possible to conduct this study. CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY Background of the Problem An unique type of education, technological education was brought into being with the increasing modernization and i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n of.Canadian society. Rapid advances i n technology and automation and major innovations i n the organization and administration of goods and services are dominant trends enlarging the need for s k i l l e d technologists (Harvey, 1974, p. 24). From a fu n c t i o n a l i s t perspective, educational structures exist to perform needed functions of a society (Kinloch, 1977, pp. 190-196). Institutes of technology have emerged to prepare technologists to perform required s k i l l e d jobs i n industry, business, health, and service organizations. These changes i n society have also resulted i n percentage increases of professionals (Harvey, p. 19)', and as technologists serve i n support capacities to professionals, the requirement for technologists i s further augmented. Concomitantly, the need for labouring and semi-skilled workers i s decreasing.^ These proportional changes i n occupational c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s have been reflected i n an increased demand for i n s t i t u t i o n s that offer techno-l o g i c a l education (for the l i s t i n g of .technological i n s t i t u t e s see Tables 1 and 2). i n addition to these i n s t i t u t i o n s providing technological Detailed evidence of these changes i n proportions of major occupational types i s given by Harvey i n the reference ci t e d . 2. education, there are 136 community colleges, most of which offer techno-l o g i c a l education (Canadian Education Association, 1978, pp. 132-142). The function of technological education for society i s unique i n comparison to other types of post-secondary education. I t i s to prepare technologists to carry out semi-professional and highly technical jobs intermediate i n function and prestige between the trades and professional occupations. In contrast, u n i v e r s i t i e s offer advanced l i b e r a l education i n addition to providing scholars, researchers, and professionals. The two year colleges are multi-functional as they produce graduates to f i l l career, technical, and vocational jobs as w e l l as providing general and l i b e r a l educations for students. The mandate of vocational and trade school i n s t i t u t i o n s i s to provide needed manpower for s k i l l e d trades and semi-s k i l l e d occupations. Thus, technological i n s t i t u t e s s p e c i a l i z i n g i n technological education have an unique role among post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s . In addition to supplying needed technologists who provide v i t a l services, technological education provides other functions for society. Technological i n s t i t u t i o n s have l i a i s o n with business, industry, health, and service organizations to produce the required number of graduate technologists and not oversupply the market. As a r e s u l t , technologists contribute to economic s t a b i l i t y as the vast majority obtain employment. Also, s t a b i l i t y of society i s enhanced as technologists are socialized or moulded into appropriate attitudes for th e i r occupations. These attitudes provide firm foundations for successful careers i n business, health, and engineering f i e l d s . In the absence of t h i s process, occupational s t a b i l i t y would be threatened. Not only continuance of technological jobs i n their t r a d i t i o n a l forms but also innovative approaches to new demands are accomplished by techno-l o g i c a l education. Rapid, i n d u s t r i a l changes are incorporated into technological education enabling new graduates to have the knowledge and s k i l l s to deal with them. The progress and ultimately the survival of society i s promoted by adapting to these alterations. Statement of the Problem The purpose of this study was to determine an I n s t i t u t e of Technology f u l l - t i m e , two and three year technological program faculty's perceptions of their desired i d e n t i t y and compare i t with the (1) administrator's perceptions of desired faculty i d e n t i t y and (2) faculty's actual i d e n t i t y . Technological education and i t s graduates are influenced by techno-l o g i c a l teaching faculty. I t i s l o g i c a l that knowing work related ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s , attributes, and a c t i v i t i e s of faculty who provide technological education would give indications of the character of i n s t i t u t e s of technology, their programs, and their graduates. However, l i t t l e i s known about these characteristics of the technological faculty. Thus, this study was designed to determine both the actual and desired credentials, attributes, and a c t i v i t i e s of a technological faculty. Methodology Different questionnaires were administered to the faculty and administrators of the I n s t i t u t e of Technology who were d i r e c t l y involved with teaching or administrating f u l l - t i m e , day school, two and three year technological programs. The questionnaires given to faculty asked 4. questions about their actual professional/technologist, academic, and teacher characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s ; and their perceptions of desir-able characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s for them in'the same three areas. In the questionnaires given to administrators they were asked what characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s they thought desirable for faculty i n the same three i d e n t i t y dimensions. The data were then analyzed to provide information on: 1. The faculty's actual characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s i n the dimensions of professional/ technologist, academic,and teacher; 2. Congruence between administrator's and faculty's perceptions of desirable character-i s t i c s and a c t i v i t i e s for faculty; and 3. Congruence between actual and desirable characteristics for faculty as perceived by faculty. • Description of Technological I n s t i t u t e Selected for Study An I n s t i t u t e of Technology (hereafter referred to as "the Institute") located i n Western Canada was selected for the present study. The Inst i t u t e i s the only Canadian technological i n s t i t u t e exclusively offering two and three year technological programs leading to diplomas i n business, engineering,and health technologies on a f u l l - t i m e , day school basis. There are other Canadian i n s t i t u t e s having combinations of technological, technical, vocational, and degree programs given as f u l l - t i m e , day school programs. I t was thought that by selecting an i n s t i t u t e 5. e x c l u s i v e l y providing technological programs, a more pure port r a y a l of technological f a c u l t y would be attained. Perhaps, i n mixed program i n s t i t u t i o n s the i d e n t i t y of f a c u l t y teaching technological programs has been influenced by those teaching non-technological programs. The I n s t i t u t e ' s programs are technology oriented and focussed on the technological knowledge required to do the job, rather than on broad, general education goals. This enables the program length to be r e s t r i c t e d to two years. In the three year programs, the t h i r d year i s spent i n the f i e l d , be i t a h o s p i t a l or some other applicable organization (Bremer, 1973, p. 8; Thorn, 1971, p. 1). The I n s t i t u t e opened i t s doors i n 1964 with 647 students registered i n 17 technologies. The i n s t i t u t i o n expanded and enrolled 3,460 students i n 26 technologies by 1976-77 (Career Campus, 1977). The programs are categorized as technologies or departments, many of which have options or sub-programs. For example, Building Technology has three options: architecture, economics, and services. The technologies are c l a s s i f i e d and administrated by three d i v i s i o n s — b u s i n e s s , engineering, and healths There i s a fourth d i v i s i o n named core which i s a service d i v i s i o n providing science and humanities courses to the various technologies. The departments i n core are chemistry, english, mathematics, and physics. The health sciences department i s also considered a core department for purposes of t h i s study, as i t provides s o c i a l and health science courses. Faculty are usually assigned to the technologies i n which they i n s t r u c t , and are d i r e c t l y administrated by department heads. Technology siz e ranges from one to 53 f a c u l t y members. 6. D e f i n i t i o n of Terms Institutes of Technology: Post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s s p e c i a l i z i n g i n offering varied technological programs of two to three years i n length leading to diplomas of technology. Technological Programs: Semi-professional, technical education programs i n business, industry, health, agriculture, and public service' f i e l d s as well as technical education programs for highly s k i l l e d technicians i n industry (Harris, 1964, p. 62). They are designed to produce graduates who w i l l a s s i s t professionals working i n applied science f i e l d s . These programs: 1. Are terminal, as upon completion graduates are worthy of being employed. 2. Have in-depth instruction r e s t r i c t e d to the technological specialty, usually given over two years. However, length varies from 1 to 3 years. 3. Are based on science and technology, but r e s t r i c t theory to that required to apply to s k i l l s . , 4. Have heavy emphasis upon application for s k i l l competency i n the technological f i e l d (Graney, 1964, pp. v-4; White, 1969, pp. 6-7; Henderson, Note 1). Identity: The composite of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , attributes, and a c t i v i t i e s relevant to being a professional/technologist, an academic, and a teacher. 7. Identity Dimensions: The three components of i d e n t i t y , namely professional/technologist, academic, and teacher. Actual State: The credentials faculty possess, attributes they have, and a c t i v i t i e s they have or are engaged i n . Desired State: The credentials, attributes, and a c t i v i t i e s perceived as useful and valuable for faculty to possess or to engage i n . Hypotheses The following hypotheses were examined: 1. There are no differences i n the actual i d e n t i t y dimensions of professional/technologist, academic, and teacher among the four faculty groups (core, business, engineering, and health). 2. There are no differences i n the desired state of the i d e n t i t y dimensions as perceived by the faculty groups and administrators. 3. There are no differences between the actual and desired states of the id e n t i t y dimensions within each faculty group as perceived by faculty. Importance of the Study This study may be j u s t i f i e d for many reasons. Foremost, i t i s not a duplication of previous studies. Rather, i t breaks new research ground and .adds to the l i t e r a t u r e by providing data on faculty teaching i n a Canadian technological i n s t i t u t e . 8. The study provides the actual characteristics of the i d e n t i t y areas of professional/technologist, academic, and teacher for the four faculty groups. What are the implications should the groups have divergent i d e n t i t i e s ? Would this act as a hindrance or asset for the i n s t i t u t i o n ? Could the differences function as cross f e r t i l i z a t i o n between the groupings and encourage progressive development and change i n faculty? Or, would they lead to destructive c o n f l i c t between them? Should there be c o n f l i c t ? How could i t be handled or resolved? What are the ramifications should the groups' i d e n t i t i e s prove similar? Would th i s lead to faculty stagnation and complacency? Would this point to the future professionalization of technological i n s t i t u t e faculty such as has already occurred with university faculty? Obtaining professional status as technological i n s t i t u t e faculty would require them to f e e l a common ide n t i t y with a l l faculty teaching technological programs. By achieving professional status they would become a respected and recognized occupational group i n society (Cohen, 1973, p. 102). Comparing the expectations of the administrators with that of faculty on desirable characteristics and attributes for faculty, would provide a basis for understanding the agreement or c o n f l i c t between labour and management in technological i n s t i t u t i o n s . On a p r a c t i c a l l e v e l the data may provide clues for resolving c o n f l i c t , or conversely, maintaining agreement between them. This would have long term implications for the s t a b i l i t y and survival of technological i n s t i t u t i o n s . There are various ramifications dependent upon the outcome of the actual characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s of faculty compared with those seen as desirable for them. If these two states are similar then the organization i s l i k e l y i n a state of consolidation or continuity. However, should they 9. d i f f e r , then the i n s t i t u t i o n i s possibly i n a state of c o n f l i c t or change. This leads to how the discrepancy between what faculty are and what they think they should be could be reduced. What would be the cost of reducing the differences? How could programs be implemented to achieve this end? What kinds of i n service education programs; what kinds of educational and i n d u s t r i a l leaves of absence? And, what should be the chara c t e r i s t i c s of future faculty to hire? In other words, researchers and education p r a c t i -tioners would have a beginning data base to plan strategies for reducing the discrepancy i n levels of faculty achievement. Also, the data could be used to outline s i m i l a r i t i e s i n actual and desired states of faculty to plan for continuity i n technological programs. The p r o f i l e of faculty produced i n th i s study could be compared with future p r o f i l e s , thus obtaining trends of technological education. This would have implications for the future education and h i r i n g of technological faculty. Organization of the Thesis This thesis i s organized into f i v e chapters and appendices. The review of selected l i t e r a t u r e appears i n Chapter I I . Chapter I I I contains a description of the research methodology. The results from the analyses of the questionnaires appear i n Chapter IV. Chapter V includes a summary of the previous chapters, conclusions based on the research findings,?arid directions for future research. Forms, questionnaires, and rationale for content appear i n the Appendices. CHAPTER I I REVIEW OF SELECTED RELATED LITERATURE The review of selected l i t e r a t u r e w i l l be considered under two major headings: A. Literature related to the d e f i n i t i o n of technological education  and i n s t i t u t i o n s providing i t . " Technological education and i n s t i t u t i o n s offering technological education have been variously and inconsistently named. These inconsistencies are discussed i n this section. B. Selected l i t e r a t u r e related to the ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s , a t t r i b u t e s , and a c t i v i t i e s of faculty teaching i n technological programs. Two per-spectives concerning the nature of technological faculty are presented i n thi s section. One perspective i s describing the actual characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s of technological faculty relevant to being professionals, academics, and teachers. The other i s r e l a t i n g those characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s thought desirable for technological faculty to possess i n the same three areas. Both perspectives are presented together to allow for comparisons and contrasts. Most of the sources consulted are Canadian as the study i s concerned with Canadian, technological faculty. Literature Related to the D e f i n i t i o n of Technological Education and Institutions Providing I t The search for information on Canadian technological faculty teaching i n technological i n s t i t u t i o n s i s complicated by the inconsistent and multiple meanings for the term "technological." Many a r t i c l e s appear to refer to technological faculty; however, they actually deal with faculty teaching trade and vocational programs. "Technological" i s commonly used synonymously with the terms "trade", "vocational", and "technical." This lack of clear d e f i n i t i o n extends to the naming of i n s t i t u t i o n s offering technological education. A major factor i s that technological programs are given i n single and multipurposed educational organizations— colleges, u n i v e r s i t i e s , i n s t i t u t e s of technology, and vocational and trade schools. This practice i s evident i n S t a t i s t i c s Canada's d e f i n i t i o n of community colleges which c l a s s i f i e s technological i n s t i t u t e s as a type of community college and includes technological education as a function of community colleges. Community colleges are defined as: Post-secondary, non-degree granting i n s t i t u t i o n s which, while having similar functions and objectives are designated by various other terms. These are regional colleges i n B r i t i s h Columbia (some now u t i l i z i n g the term "community"), colleges of applied arts and technology (CAAT's) i n Ontario, general and vocational colleges (Colleges d'Enseignemerit General et Professional, (CEGEP's) i n Quebec, i n s t i t u t e s of technology, technical i n s t i t u t e s and i n s t i t u t e s of applied arts and sciences. Also included are establishments providing training i n the specialized f i e l d s of agriculture, f i s h e r i e s , marine technologies, surveying and para-medical technologies. . . . The post-secondary programs offered by community colleges are b a s i c a l l y of two types: university transfer programs and semi-professional career programs. The former provide a student with standing equivalent to the f i r s t or second year of a university degree program with which he can apply for admission to subsequent senior years at a degree-granting i n s t i t u t i o n . The l a t t e r prepare a student to practice a career d i r e c t l y upon completion of the program. They take at least one school year consisting of 24 weeks or more for completion, but more commonly two or three years and sometimes four. The one year programs lead to a c e r t i f i c a t e ; the longer programs lead to a diploma of applied a r t s , a diploma of technology, a diploma of a g r i c u l t u r a l technology or to a nursing diploma leading to r e g i s t r a t i o n (R.N.) ( S t a t i s t i c s Canada, 1976, p. 1). According to S t a t i s t i c s Canada there are 142 community colleges i n Canada. The regional colleges, the CAAT's, and the CEGEP's a l l offer varied, multipurposed programs of l i b e r a l education, trade, and vocational education as well as career and technological education. Adding to the problem i s that i n s t i t u t i o n s named i n s t i t u t e s of technology often provide trade and vocational programs i n addition to technological programs. The CEA Handbook (Canadian Education Association, 1978) l i s t s f i v e i n s t i t u t i o n s labelled as Institutes of Technology. These are presented i n Table 1. However, with the exception of the B r i t i s h Columbia I n s t i t u t e of Technology, they specialize i n trade and vocational as well as technological programs. Also, the lengths of the programs vary from .5 weeks to 3 years. Some examples of programs offered at the Northern Alberta I n s t i t u t e of Technology i n 1975-1976 are: mixology—5 weeks, r e t a i l meat c u t t i n g — 5 months, veterinarian animal science technology—1 year, and building construction technology—2 years. (Northern Alberta I n s t i t u t e of Technology, 1975). I t i s apparent the name " i n s t i t u t e of technology" does not adequately r e f l e c t the r e a l nature of the programs given at the particular i n s t i t u t i o n . A similar name to i n s t i t u t e of technology i s technical i n s t i t u t e . The Saskatchewan Technical Institute (Government of Saskatchewan, 1978) offers vocational and technological programs as do the majority of the in s t i t u t e s of technology. Institutions offering technological education may specialize i n a particular technology, or offer a number of diverse technological programs (agriculture, business, engineering, forestry, health, s o c i a l services, and marine technologies). The i n s t i t u t i o n a l labels do not always r e f l e c t 13. these variations. S t a t i s t i c s Canada (1976) l i s t s 15 i n s t i t u t i o n s whose t i t l e s give the impression of s p e c i a l i z i n g i n a p a r t i c u l a r technology. These appear i n Table 2. TABLE 1 CANADIAN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS NAMED INSTITUTES OF TECHNOLOGY B r i t i s h Columbia In s t i t u t e of Technology Northern Alberta I n s t i t u t e of Technology Southern Alberta I n s t i t u t e of Technology Nova Scotia I n s t i t u t e of Technology St. John In s t i t u t e of Technology (Canadian Education Association, 1978, pp. 132-142). Inst i t u t i o n s that exclusively offer technological education may be variously named academies, schools, colleges, community colleges, junior colleges, i n s t i t u t e s , and polytechnical i n s t i t u t e s (Graney, 1964, pp. 1-3). This d i v e r s i t y further obscures the meaning of technological education. Greenaway (1977) states i n s t i t u t i o n s s p e c i a l i z i n g i n technological education are named polytechnics i n England, but cautions that some poly-technics also provide degree and vocational programs or do not offer technological education at a l l . In summary, technological education i s offered i n i n s t i t u t i o n s also providing trade and vocational education and i s considered as synonymous with trade and vocational education. Also, technological education i s offered by single and multipurpose i n s t i t u t i o n s — t h e names of which f a i l to c l e a r l y depict the types of education offered by them. The inconsistent l a b e l l i n g of technological education and i n s t i t u t i o n s providing i t , may r e f l e c t the r e l a t i v e newness of technological education. TABLE 2 NAMES AND LOCATIONS OF INSTITUTIONS IN CANADA APPEARING TO SPECIALIZE IN ONE TECHNOLOGY Canadian Coast Guard College, Sidney Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College, Toronto C e n t r a l l a College of A g r i c u l t u r a l Technology, Huron Park Ecole de Musique Vincent d Indy, Outremont I n s t i t u t "Control Data a I n s t i t u t de Tourisme et d ' H o t e l l e r i e , Montreal Kemptville College of A g r i c u l t u r a l Technology, Kemptville Maritime Forest Ranger School, Fredericton New Liskeard College of A g r i c u l t u r a l Technology, New Liskeard Niagara Park's Commission School of H o r t i c u l t u r e , Niagara Park Nova Scotia Land Survey I n s t i t u t e , Lawrencetown Nova Scotia Nautical I n s t i t u t e , Halifax 0'Sullivan Business College, Montreal Ridgetown College of A g r i c u l t u r a l Technology, Ridgetown Toronto I n s t i t u t e of Medical Technology, Toronto a L o c a t i o n not s p e c i f i e d . ( S t a t i s t i c s Canada, 1976, p p ; . 1 7 - 1 8 ) c " Selected Literature Related to the Characteristics, Attributes, and A c t i v i t i e s of Faculty Teaching i n Technological Programs As expected there i s l i t t l e information available on the actual and desirable characteristics of Canadian faculty teaching technological programs. However, a number of sources reveal some information. These sources include: calendars of i n s t i t u t e s of technology, major surveys, personal communications, and selected publications. Each of these sources w i l l be considered i n turn. The Calendar as a Source of Actual Qualifications of Teaching Faculty The B r i t i s h Columbia In s t i t u t e of Technology calendar (and others) provide an indication of the actual professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n s and academic degrees of faculty. However, there i s limited value i n consulting calendars as they are generally out of date by the time they are published. In addition, some faculty undertake educational leave programs to obtain additional credentials. Another problem i s the lack of information specifying which individuals are faculty and which are supporting the i n s t r u c t i o n a l staff (teaching and laboratory assistants). Calendars provide only an indication of professional and academic credentials of faculty. Randomly selected programs from the three major technological divisions i n the B r i t i s h Columbia I n s t i t u t e of Technology calendar provide a rough indication of faculty credentials. Of the seven i n s t r u c t i o n a l staff i n one business option, there are three with master degrees and two with bachelor degrees as their highest academic q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . None l i s t professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n . In a larger, engineering technology program with 25 i n s t r u c t i o n a l s t a f f , 2 have doctoral degrees, 5 have master degrees and none have bachelor degrees. There are 7 with advanced technological or professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n and 6 with basic c e r t i f i c a t i o n . F i n a l l y , i n the health technology d i v i s i o n , a pa r t i c u l a r department with 10 i n s t r u c t i o n a l s t a f f has a l l with basic professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n and only 1 with an additional bachelor degree ( B r i t i s h Columbia I n s t i t u t e of Technology, 1976b). Research on Technological Faculty Dennison, Jones, Forrester, and Tunner (1973) conducted a survey of one-half the 1,400 faculty teaching at most of the public colleges i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The faculty includes those teaching vocational, tech-n i c a l and career, and academic programs. The data on the p r o v i n c i a l totals of the faculty teaching mainly i n the technical and career programs gave some clues as to l i k e l y expectations of technological faculty teaching i n exclusively technological education i n s t i t u t i o n s . The survey provides data on both the background characteristics of technical/career faculty and what they perceive as desirable characteristics for faculty. A l i m i t a t i o n of t h i s data results from the technical/career faculty teaching i n programs varying i n length from less than a year to 3 years. The length of the program i n which they teach, may influence what they perceive as desirable characteristics for faculty to have, as w e l l as the actual characteristics they do possess. With regard to their highest professional or technologist credentials, roughly one-fifth .have trade c e r t i f i c a t e s or diplomas as their highest credentials. (Advanced professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n credentials were not tested.) S l i g h t l y less than one-half report their l a s t position held prior joining college faculty was i n business or industry. Half of the technical/ career faculty respondents report they think "medium^ emphasis" should be placed on their professional q u a l i f i c a t i o n s relevant to promotion and/or salary matter decisions. Approximately one-third report "high emphasis" should be given to t h i s . From th i s data i t appears that considerable numbers of technical/career faculty have business or industry experience and the majority think recognition should be given to their professional q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . For the highest earned academic degrees, similar proportions of technical/career faculty have master and bachelor degrees ( t o t a l l i n g two-thirds of the respondents)with only 2.7 percent having doctoral degrees. Thus, i t seems advanced degrees do not receive high p r i o r i t y as evidenced by their scarcity. Dennison's et a l . survey reveals pertinent data on actual teaching credentials and experience. Only 11 percent of the respondents have teaching c e r t i f i c a t e s as their highest earned q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . ..In_response to the question "What was the l a s t position held prior to coming onto the college faculty?", 5.4 percent report they had taught or conducted related duties i n u n i v e r s i t i e s ; 3.4 percent i n colleges; 5.9 percent i n technical i n s t i t u t e s ; 3.9 percent i n vocational schools; and 10.2 percent i n the school system. Therefore, over one-quarter of faculty have prior teaching experience and the larger proportion of i t (18.6 percent) i n post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s . Respondents were asked questions on the importance of teaching. The vast majority (92.8 percent) of the respondents say "high importance" should-be placed on the teaching a b i l i t y of faculty i n salary and promotion decisions. Also, two-thirds responded they are i n favour of an internship program of approximately one semester for prospective college teachers. However, only 19.1 percent are i n favour of compulsory p r o v i n c i a l c e r t i f i -cation;:, of college teachers. From th i s data i t would appear that teaching s k i l l s are seen as very important by technical/career faculty; however, they are generally not i n favour of having teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n o f f i c i a l l y required. The other major research study on technological faculty was Richard Wroot's study on "The Need for Pedagogical Training as Perceived by the Staff of Alberta Institutes of Technology", submitted as a master's thesis i n 1970. The technological faculty comprised one component of the t o t a l sample which included senior and middle administrators, i n s t r u c t o r s a n d student service personnel such as l i b r a r i a n s , physical educators, and counsellors. The Alberta Institutes of Technology are similar to the B r i t i s h Columbian colleges i n that they have both vocational and technical education; however, they do not offer university transfer programs. Wroot provides some data on the professional and academic credentials of a l l tested s t a f f . However, separate s t a t i s t i c s for faculty teaching technological programs are not available. There are limited data on instructors' (which includes vocational and technological instructors) teacher credentials. Over one-half of the instructors (56.0 percent) have the I n s t i t u t e inservice tr a i n i n g c e r t i f i -cate,;/ 3.6 percent have another, non-university, teaching c e r t i f i c a t e ; 11.3 percent have university education courses, but less than a teaching c e r t i f i -ca,te<; 9.3 percent have an Alberta teaching c e r t i f i c a t e ; 10.9 percent have a bachelor of education degree; and 1.2 percent have a master of education degree. Those with no teacher training attainment or credentials account for 7.5 percent. Unfortunately, these figures cannot be compared to Dennison's e_t a l . data as the i r figures exclude vocational faculty and pertain only to technological and career faculty. S i m i l a r l y , Wroot's data can not be used to make a direct comparison with the I n s t i t u t e as the l a t t e r does not have vocational and trade programs. Wroot's study concentrates on what the Alberta Institutes of Technology staff perceived as desirable s k i l l s , knowledge, and inservice tr a i n i n g a c t i v i t i e s and techniques for teaching. Wroot uses a f i v e point L i k e r t scale (Helmstadter, 1970, p. 370) ranging from "very necessary" to "no use" to determine the value staff placed on teaching s k i l l s . Approximate percentages'.of s t a f f rating s k i l l s as "necessary" or "very necessary" are given for the following valued s k i l l s : selection and use of appropriate teaching methods and communication s k i l l s — o v e r 90 percent; testing and evaluation techniques, 83 percent; development and maintenance of d i s c i p l i n e i n class, 72 percent; preparation and use of subject outlines, development of educational objectives, and diagnosis of learning and teaching problems— a l l having s l i g h t l y less than 65 percent. Wroot also tested s t a f f opinions on selected techniques and. a b i l i t i e s to increase teaching competence by use of a scale ranging from "very h e l p f u l " to "no help." Those techniques and f a c i l i t i e s related as "helpful" or "very h e l p f u l " by the various majorities of s t a f f are: provision of sources of expert guidance and advice on instruction problems, 75.4 per-cent ;-demonstration of teaching methods and techniques, 72.0 percent; departmental meetings and seminars on i n s t r u c t i o n a l problems, 66.4 percent; opportunity for instructors to observe fellow instructors conducting classes and labs, 60.8 percent; introduction of special university courses for instructors i n post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s to improve i n s t r u c t i o n , 59.8 percent; observation of instructors for the purpose of making recommendations and offering advice for improvement, 57.1 percent; and provision of continuing inservice training programs by i n s t i t u t e s t a f f , 50.9 percent. The knowledge and s k i l l s not.rated as important are: preparation and use of d a i l y lesson plans rated as either "no help", " l i t t l e help", or "helpful" by 51.2 percent of s t a f f ; and knowledge of human growth and development. Specific figures on th i s l a t t e r dimension are not available. From the s k i l l s and a c t i v i t i e s rated as being " h e l p f u l " or "necessary" i t i s apparent that teaching i s seen as an important a c t i v i t i y by techno-l o g i c a l i n s t i t u t e s t a f f . There i s much concern with the methodology and a c t i v i t y of teaching as i t pertains to the mechanics and problems encountered while teaching. This supports Graney's (1964, p. 83) contention that the main business of technical i n s t i t u t e faculty i s teaching. The prime concern of the staff r e f l e c t s t h i s view. I t would have been very helpful to have data on the technological program faculty ratings as d i s t i n c t from the s t a f f category; however, Wroot does not provide t h i s . The r e l a t i v e lack of emphasis on human growth and development subject matter perhaps r e f l e c t s the view that students i n vocational and techno-l o g i c a l programs are r e l a t i v e l y sure of their occupational choice. There-fore, faculty do not perceive occupational counselling as part of their job. Personal Communications on Technological Faculty Personal communications (telephone interviews and a l e t t e r ) with three government o f f i c i a l s of the technical and vocational divisions of higher education departments i n Western Canada sought to ascertain characteristics 21. of technological program faculty. They expressed the view that credentials for faculty teaching i n technological programs develop i n an ad hoc fashion according to the requirements of the i n s t i t u t e s and the programs under con-sideration. They stressed there are no, formal, unalterable c r i t e r i a for technological faculty determined by the government. Telephone interviews with two personnel o f f i c e r s of i n s t i t u t e s of technology located i n Western Canada were also conducted. Both o f f i c e r s emphasized work experience i n the technological specialty i s highly d e s i r -able for technological faculty. One of the o f f i c e r s thought appropriate c e r t i f i c a t i o n i n the professional area and/or a bachelor degree i n the area of expertise would be valuable for faculty. The other expressed a master" degree i s not essential but faculty require the same l e v e l of q u a l i f i c a t i o n with which their students w i l l graduate. For teaching credentials, the o f f i c e r s agreed a teaching c e r t i f i c a t e i s not essential but considered desirable. New faculty are encouraged to take a one month teaching preparation course offered by the i n s t i t u t e s . They are also encouraged to take education courses on how to teach, which are recognized by salary adjustments at one of the i n s t i t u t e s . An interview with an assistant academic re g i s t r a r of a polytechnic located i n London, England yielded similar, information. Appropriate professional and technological q u a l i f i c a i t o n s ( c e r t i f i c a t i o n by professional bodies) and relevant experience i n the specialty are viewed as necessary. In fact, the faculty c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme places emphasis on work experience—"senior" c l a s s i f i c a t i o n designates much experience; whereas, "junior" denotes less experience. Academically, technological faculty need a minimum of a bachelor degree to teach i n the various programs. There i s some emphasis on research credentials and a b i l i t i e s . The teaching a b i l i t i e s of technological faculty are considered important. They are strongly urged to take inservice education programs offered by the polytechnics as w e l l as courses i n i n s t r u c t i o n given by the u n i v e r s i t i e s . Selected Publications The Academic Board for Higher Education i n B r i t i s h Columbia (1965) placed similar emphasis on pertinent business and i n d u s t r i a l experience. The Board recommended "those i n charge of technical programs (in B r i t i s h Columbia colleges) be constantly i n touch with l a t e s t developments i n business and industry" (p. 25) to ensure current technological information i s given to students. Graney (1964) agreed that technological faculty need i n d u s t r i a l work experience to impart relevant, current, professional practice to students. Faculty also need to be cognizant of the technologist's role or job and have competence i n the f i e l d greater than i s required of the students. Advanced university degrees are not seen as appropriate as the object of technological programs i s to prepare technologists to perform techno-l o g i c a l tasks s k i l l f u l l y i n work environments (Graney). Bachelor and master degrees are recommended for faculty teaching technological sub-jects and science courses respectively. Graney reports faculty with limited formal academic credentials "invariably have pertinent i n d u s t r i a l experience" (p. 85). The conduct of research i s seen as an appropriate a c t i v i t y for doctoral, research oriented degrees. Since technological students are not l i k e l y to engage i n research projects i n t h e i r studies, there i s no need for faculty to have advanced research s k i l l s . Also, technological faculty rarely have previous work experience involving research; nor are laboratory f a c i l i t i e s i n technological i n s t i t u t e s conducive to carrying out research (Graney, p. 83). Technological faculty are primarily teachers who devote most of their e f f o r t to teaching. Indeed, Graney states that most technological faculty are attracted to the i n s t i t u t e s because they want to teach. Routes of faculty into teaching are varied. Many faculty come to teaching d i r e c t l y from working i n industry. Some come from having taught i n high schools. Some are professionals, notably engineers, who have some prior experience teaching i n colleges. A few faculty go the..circuitous route of leaving high school teaching to work i n industry and then on to teach i n technological i n s t i t u t e s . A small number go d i r e c t l y from college graduation to technological i n s t i t u t e teaching. To accommodate this wide disparity i n faculty's teaching backgrounds many technological i n s t i t u t e s offer pre and inservice teaching preparation for prospective faculty (Graney, pp. 83-85). There are very few sources available describing the actual credentials and backgrounds of Canadian technological faculty. The sources suggest approximately 50 percent of faculty have previous i n d u s t r i a l or business work experience; with technologist or professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n of those faculty teaching technological specialty courses. The usual academic credentials are bachelor and master . degrees. Teaching c e r t i f i c a t e s or licences are not commonly held by faculty and roughly 25. percent have previous teaching experience. Most of the available references contained policy and philosophical statements on credentials and backgrounds thought desirable for techno-l o g i c a l faculty. Although there i s some disagreement, the consensus i s in favour of relevant work experience and professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n i n 2 4 . the appropriate specialty area. Bachelor and/or master degrees i n the subjects taught are thought necessary. Teacher c e r t i f i c a t i o n or licencing i s not considered essential; however, teaching s k i l l s and competence are viewed as important. Summary The review of selected l i t e r a t u r e shows there are multiple meanings commonly associated with technological education and inconsistent l a b e l l i n g of i n s t i t u t i o n s providing technological education. The scant data a v a i l -able on Canadian technological faculty indicates heterogeneous professional, academic, and teaching credentials and experiences. Perhaps these variations r e f l e c t the emerging i d e n t i t y of ..technological faculty. Although there are differences regarding desirable q u a l i f i c a t i o n s and backgrounds for technological faculty expressed by various sources, there i s also some agreement. These diverse expectations coupled with technological education i n s t i t u t i o n s developing their own c r i t e r i a for f a c u l t y , lend credence to the interpretation that technological faculty are i n a state of becoming rather than i n a s t a b i l i z e d condition. Perhaps when i n s t i t u t e s of technology have a long history of establishment there w i l l be a d e f i n i t i v e set of c r i t e r i a for technological faculty. CHAPTER I I I RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Introduction The purpose of this study was to determine the faculty's and admin-i s t r a t o r s ' perceptions of the id e n t i t y of faculty who teach f u l l - t i m e , two and three year technological programs i n an i n s t i t u t e of technology. Data on the id e n t i t y or cha r a c t e r i s t i c s , a t t r i b u t es, and a c t i v i t i e s of faculty were obtained by two questionnaires--one administered to the Ins t i t u t e faculty and the other to Ins t i t u t e administrators. The ques-tionnaire given to faculty included questions on: 1. Their actual professional/technologist, academic, and teacher c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and a c t i v i t i e s ; and 2. Their perceptions of desirable professional/ technologist, academic, and teacher character-i s t i c s , and a c t i v i t i e s . The administrators' questionnaire contained items on what they perceived as desirable characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s for faculty i n the same three i d e n t i t y areas. The data were analyzed to produce: 1. Descriptive data on actual faculty character-i s t i c s and a c t i v i t i e s as provided by faculty; 2. A measure of congruence between administrators' and faculty's perceptions of desirable characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s for facu l t y , and 3. Wherever applicable, a measure of congruence between actual and desirable characteristics for faculty as perceived by faculty. Questionnaire Content The content of the questionnaire given to faculty and the administrators dealt with three id e n t i t y areas—professional or technologist, academic, and teacher. The basis of selection of these three areas evolved from three l i t e r a t u r e sources: f i r s t , a l i t e r a t u r e review of technological faculty; second, a c o l l e c t i v e agreement of a technological faculty; and, t h i r d , from l i t e r a t u r e sources dealing with the basic credentials, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and a c t i v i t i e s of being a professional, academic, and teacher. F i r s t , the l i t e r a t u r e review of technological faculty indicated that professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n and experience i n the technological specialty was of paramount importance for individuals teaching i n that specialty. The review also suggested an academic degree i n the f i e l d was important, and further, that previous teaching experience, possession of a teaching credential, and instruction i n teaching methods were desirable. Second, the June 15, 1976—December 31, 1977 c o l l e c t i v e agreement of the In s t i t u t e specified that credentials, experience, and a c t i v i t i e s i n the three i d e n t i t y areas were the c r i t e r i a for i n i t i a l and subsequent placement on the faculty salary scale. For i n i t i a l placement the factors included number of degrees, professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n , relevant employment experience, and teaching experience. For subsequent advancement on the salary scale the agreement stipulated: continuing professional development which enhanced expertise i n the f i e l d ; advanced educational preparation standing such as a master degree or i t s equivalent; acceptable professional standing such as an active membership i n an i n d u s t r i a l , business, or professional association; and adequate teacher t r a i n i n g such as a diploma i n education. With regard to the t h i r d source, the d e f i n i t i o n of a professional stated by Goode (1957) and Greenwood (1957) was used. They emphasized c e r t i f i c a t i o n by the professional body as the mode of entry into practicing the profession and working with other professionals after graduation to consolidate the neophyte's i d e n t i t y as a professional. Also stressed was dedication of the professional to s t r i v e to promote the knowledge, s k i l l s , and standards of the profession. The d e f i n i t i o n of an academic (O'Banion, 1973, p. 17; Singer, 1968, p. 38) was that of an i n d i v i d u a l having a doctoral degree, engaging i n scholarly pursuits , and conducting research within an university environment. A teacher was defined as a practitioner having some kind of teaching c e r t i f i c a t e or license. Background preparation may include a variety of courses i n instruction and education such as theories of learning, developmental psychology, teaching methods, curriculum development, audio-v i s u a l aids, and philosophy of post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s . As w e l l , teacher preparation may include teaching practicums, internships, and inservice courses (O'Banion, pp. 11-13; Wroot, 1970). The credentials, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and a c t i v i t i e s of being a professional, academic, and teacher, obtained from the above three sources, were modified and adapted to the respective endeavors of the technological i n s t i t u t e studied. Appendix A contains the items with accompanying rationale for t h e i r inclusion i n the three i d e n t i t y dimensions. Organization of the Questionnaires The organization of the two questionnaires differed. The faculty questionnaire was comprised of two main sections preceded by a personal data section. The f i r s t section contained questions about the actual state of faculty's c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , a t t r i b u t es, and a c t i v i t i e s for each of the professional, academic, and teacher i d e n t i t y dimensions. The second section included questions of what faculty perceived to be desirable character-i s t i c s , a t t r i b u t e s , and a c t i v i t i e s for them i n each of the same id e n t i t y dimensions. I t was thought that asking factual questions.first would help the respondents to complete the questionnaire rather than being i n i t i a l l y frustrated by hypothetical questions. To a l e r t respondents to changes i n instruction and types of questions asked, colour coding of the paper was used. The questionnaire given to faculty appears i n Appendix B. The questionnaire given to the administrators had only one main section i n which questions were asked on what they perceived to be the desirable characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s for faculty to have i n each of the three ide n t i t y dimensions. This section was preceded by a short personal data section. A section asking questions on actual characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s of faculty was not included as i t was thought i t would be d i f f i c u l t for administrators to give a composite of actual characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s 29. of the teaching faculty. Appendix C contains the questionnaire given to administrators. In the personal data sections, respondents were asked to indicate the i r d i v i s i o n rather than to specify th e i r departments. The extreme v a r i a b i l i t y i n department size (ranging from one to 53 faculty) would make i t d i f f i c u l t to s t a t i s t i c a l l y compare differences between them. Also, from an anonymity point of view, i t could be possible to deduce the respondent's id e n t i t y from t h i s information. Because of anonymity concerns, length of time worked at the Ins t i t u t e was also not asked, which might have jeopardized the response rate. The actual and desired state sections were sub-divided into four subsections. The f i r s t three corresponded to the technologist or profes-sional dimension, the academic dimension, and the teacher dimension. The fourth section consisted of the percentages of time spent i n a c t i v i t i e s of the preceding. three dimensions. Format of the Questions The format of the questions differed i n the actual and desired state sections. The question format for the actual state was forced choice. Respondents were asked to check "yes" or "no" and/or to check the applicable option(s). The desired state questions were usually presented using a Lik e r t scale (Helmstadter, 1970, p. 370) of 1 through 5 as d e s i r a b i l i t y i s generally perceived i n degrees. However, where appropriate, respondents were asked to check the appropriate option. 30. A concerted attempt was made to have p a r a l l e l questions between the actual and desired state questions for faculty, and between the desired state sections for the faculty and administrators i n order to allow comparisons to be made. However, th i s was not always f e a s i b l e — t o do so would have resulted, occasionally, i n a question that would have been nonsensical. P i l o t Testing The questionnaires were p i l o t tested with s i x students enrolled i n a graduate l e v e l course i n the Higher Education Department, University of B r i t i s h Columbia. One new item was added and the wording of some of the questions was changed on the basis of their comments. They indicated the questionnaire given to faculty was too long. However, none of the questions could be deleted. I t was thought the use of multicoloured sections would a l l e v i a t e some of the concerns that might be attributable to length. Selection of the Sample The sample for the study included a l l faculty teaching exclusively i n f u l l - t i m e , two and three year programs leading to diplomas of technology at the Ins t i t u t e and the administrators d i r e c t l y involved with administrating these programs. Altogether, there were 289 faculty and 36 administrators. The faculty sample was sub-grouped into four d i v i s i o n s : Business, Engineering, Health, and Core. The f i r s t three r e f l e c t the types of tech-nological programs offered. The Core d i v i s i o n provides science and humanity courses to the various technologies. Table 3 shows the number of faculty i n each d i v i s i o n . No random sampling was.performed for each group; a l l were sent questionnaires. TABLE 3 NUMBERS OF FACULTY FOR EACH DIVISION Division Number of Faculty Business 66 Engineering 91 Health 72 Core 60 Excluded from the above sample were those faculty members who were: 1. Teaching industry services programs providing on-the-job tra i n i n g to business, industry, and governmental agencies; 2. Teaching career programs given on a part-time basis to business, health, or academic i n s t i t u t i o n s ; 3. On an educational sabbatical; 4. On long term d i s a b i l i t y ; or 5. On "temporary" status as replacements for faculty on leave. Exclusions l i s t e d i n numbers (1) and (2) were made as they were not within the scope of the study. The other exclusions were based on the rationale that "temporary" or "on leave" faculty would not have t h e i r i d e n t i t y as f u l l y formed as "permanent" faculty. The administrators' group consisted of 27 department heads and nine senior executives ( p r i n c i p a l , executive directors, and d i v i s i o n d i r e c t o r s ) . Both permanent and acting status positions were included to avoid jeop-ardizing the minimum required sample size for s t a t i s t i c a l analysis. Excluded from the sample were administrators involved i n a u x i l i a r y and support functions i n the I n s t i t u t e . Data Collection Procedures Collection of the data was done through a mail survey with a 100 per-cent follow-up. Prior to the i n i t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n , co-operation of both faculty and administration was sought. Separate meetings with the Institute's p r i n c i p a l and available faculty union executive members were held i n January of 1977 to present the nature of the study i n general terms. The outcome of the meetings was that support was expressed by both parties. I t was l a t e r decided not to have the study "sponsored" by either management (principal) or labour (staff union) as i t was thought i t would best be received i f presented as a research project not a f f i l i a t e d with either labour or management. To assist i n obtaining a favourable response to the questionnaires i t was sought to create an appealing "professional" appearance by using colour coded paper and varying type sizes and styles. Also, the questionnaires were distributed i n a package consisting of a personalized l e t t e r (copies of which appear i n Appendices D and E ), questionnaire, and a stamped, addressed return envelope. Further, the d i s t r i b u t i o n , which occurred i n the early spring of 1977, was by two methods; f i r s t l y , to the faculty and department heads v i a the i r i n d i v i d u a l mail s l o t s i n the Institute's centrally located mailroom; and secondly, to the senior executives v i a personal delivery to t h e i r respective o f f i c e s . To obtain additional responses, a blanket follow-up was conducted 1 month after the i n i t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n — 3 weeks before the end of the school term. As there was no method to determine which respondents had already 33. replied, a 100 percent follow-up was used. This was explained i n the accompanying l e t t e r s , copies of which appear i n Appendices D and E. .  During the i n i t i a l and .follow-up d i s t r i b u t i o n period, faculty members and administrators were contacted i n their o f f i c e s and i n the mail-room to urge their ..co-operation. Data Analyses A l l of the returned questionnaires were checked for completeness, coded, and checked for coder r e l i a b i l i t y . The data were keypunched and v e r i f i e d 100 percent. I n i t i a l editing to determine out-of-range responses and unacceptable amounts of missing data was done. For t h i s , a l l of the questionnaires were inspected by hand and non-response items.tabulated for each question-naire. Visual inspection revealed high-non-response rates for the f i r s t half of question 16 and the second half of question 23 (asking the useful-ness of types of: professional or technological work experiences and teaching experiences respectively). Also, f i v e faculty respondents did not respond to eight or more items. Consequently, these questions and the f i v e respondents were deleted from the questionnaire analysis. The f i n a l number of respondents included i n analyses was 224. Also, a preliminary analysis was done to determine i f the senior executives and department heads, the two groups comprising the adminis-tra t o r s , could be treated as a single group. One way analysis of variance for each item revealed that only three of the 43 items had s i g n i f i c a n t differences (p <.05). This number could be expected by^chance alone. As w e l l , the s i g n i f i c a n t differences found were not considered c r u c i a l . Therefore, i t was decided to treat the;;two groups as a single "adminis-tr a t o r s " group. The data were then analyzed i n phases. Items asking the "actual" characteristics and some items asking the "desirable" characteristics were analyzed using cross-tabulations providing the percentages of respondents i n each group that responded to each option within each item. The MTS/SPSS, Version 7 Program was used. Tests of significance were not performed as the expected c e l l frequencies were less than f i v e for the options of many of the questions. Items asking the respondents to rate the " d e s i r a b i l i t y " of character-i s t i c s for faculty on a Likert scale (Helmstadter, 1970, pi ,448) were analyzed using multivariate and univariate analysis of variance which tests for s i g n i f i c a n t differences. The program used for t h i s was Version-5.3, distributed by the International Educational Services of Chicago, I l l i n o i s . Means and standard deviations were also obtained from t h i s program. Scheff e' Multiple Comparisons procedure to detect the source of s i g n i f i c a n t differences between the groups was done using the SPSS, Version H, Release 7.01 Program. For the actual and desired states of the composite of the three i d e n t i t y dimensions items, one way analysis of variance after arc sine transformations was done on each dimension using the BMDP1V Program of the Health Sciences Computing F a c i l i t y , University of Los Angeles (1977). If s i g n i f i c a n t differences were obtained, Scheffe's Multiple Comparisons procedure (Glass & Stanley, 1970, pp. 388-393) was done to i d e n t i f y the groups between which there were s i g n i f i c a n t differences. Means and standard deviations for the i d e n t i t y dimensions were obtained using the MTS/SPSS, Version H Program for the actual state, and the International Educational Services, Chicago, I l l i n o i s : Program (copyright National Educational Resources, 1972) for the desired state items. A l l computer analyses were performed on an IBM 370/168 Computer maintained by the Computing Center, University of B r i t i s h Columbia. Summary This study was designed to determine the faculty's and adminis -r trators' perception of the i d e n t i t y of faculty who teach f u l l - t i m e , two and three year technological programs i n an i n s t i t u t e of technology. The research instrument, sample selection, data c o l l e c t i o n , and data analyses procedures were presented. CHAPTER IV FINDINGS Introduction In t h i s chapter the results from the analyses of the questionnaires J described i n the previous chapter are presented i n four sections. A description of the response rates and demographic information of the groups are presented i n the f i r s t section. The results from examining the f i r s t hypothesis that there are no differences i n the actual i d e n t i t y dimensions of professional/technologist, academic, and teacher among the four faculty groups are presented i n the second section. The results corresponding to the second hypothesis, describing" perceived differences i n the desired state of the i d e n t i t y dimensions among faculty groups and administrators, are presented i n the t h i r d section. In the fourth and f i n a l section results describing the differences between the actual and desired states on selected i d e n t i t y dimensions for each faculty group as perceived by faculty are presented. Response Rates and Demographic Information The response rates of faculty and administrators to the i n i t i a l and follow-up d i s t r i b u t i o n of the questionnaires are presented i n Table 4. As shown i n Table 4, approximately 50 percent of the faculty responded to the i n i t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n and an additional 18.3 percent returned t h e i r question-naire i n reply to the follow-up. The response rate varied by d i v i s i o n , ranging from 59.3 percent (for engineering) to 78.8 percent (for business). TABLE 4 RESPONSE RATES FOR QUESTIONNAIRES BY GROUPS .0) cO cu CU u !-( T3 ,3 cu s 0) CO CU 4J 4-1 , g 3 .£> CU N e B U . 3 3 *—' 3 •H rH •H •H is Z CO CO CU *— co •>—' C 3 T3 a 13 60 0) C <d (U CO CU CO CO CO CO O CO CO 4-1 0) 3 4J •H 4-1 33 3 CO s—s o 3 ^ 4-1 O cu CU c CU ft CD CU CU CO 3 CO CO CJ o CO CO 60 "3 60 CU cu S a) U ex cO cu n) 3 cfl 3 4J U 3 /-s n CU rH CO 4-1 P i 4J O 4J O* 3 •H 2 CO •iH P-i cO CU a s ft s X> cfl ^ CU cO *—' s 4-1 P i a) ft QJ CD CU 3 60 3 o o 3 O cu o o 13 3 CO cO 3 CO o H iH 1 r4 P i M CU O -H 4-1 O •H 3 cfl cu S cu CU 3 •H CO 3 •H co a) ft ft •H PH O P-l rH PM CU U 4-1 CU 4-1 3 3 3 4-1 rH cO & 3 CO rH CJ CO rH cr O O •H rH X I 4J 13 S 4-1 CU cO U cu CO cu U tH 3 3 O 3 O 3 3" CU 3 3 0) 3 C n C3 U 1—1 co fx< CO H CO S3 Pi O* <C PH Faculty by d i v i s i o n : Core Business Engineering Health Total 60 29 (48.3) 66 46 (69.7) 91 40 (44.0) 72 30 (41.7) . 14 (23.3) 6 (9.1) 14 (15.4) 18 (25.0) 43 (71.7) 52 (78.8) 54 (59.3) 48 (66.7) 39 (65.0) 52 (78.8) 54 (59.3) 46 (63.9) 39 (20.4) 52 (27.2) 54 (28.3) 46 (24.1) 289 145 (50.2) 53° (18.3) 198 b (68.5) 191 191 (66.1) (100.0) Administrators: Senior Executives Department Heads Total Sample Total 9 6 (66.7) 27 22 (81.5) 2 (22.2) 3 (11.1) 8 (88.9) 25 (92.6) 8 8 (88.9) (24.2) 25 25 (92.6) (75.8) 36 28 (77.8) 5 (13.9) 33 (91.7) 33 33 (91.7) (100.0) 325 173 (53.2) 58 (17.8) 231 (71.1) 224 (68.9) ^Questionnaires shown i n t h i s column are those with had excessive amounts of missing data (5), or were returned too l a t e (1), or f a i l e d to in d i c a t e d i v i s i o n (1). ^Numbers i n column do not add up to t o t a l as one respondent f a i l e d to indica t e d i v i s i o n . The rates for health and core f e l l inbetween (66.7 and 71.7 percent respec-t i v e l y ) . Of the administrators, 91.7 percent responded. These response rates were considered adequate for the purposes of t h i s study. Percentage frequency d i s t r i b u t i o n of the faculty questionnaires used i n the analysis are shown i n the l a s t column of Table 4. The engineering and business groups comprised the largest portion—approximately 28 percent each; while health—approximately 24 percent; and core—approximately 20 percent, formed the balance. Age The age d i s t r i b u t i o n of the respondents i n each group i s shown i n Figure 1. As shown, the greatest percentage of each faculty d i v i s i o n (ranging from 62.9 to 75.0 percent) reported t h e i r age to be between 31 and 50 years. Approximately 88 percent of the administrators indicated the i r age to be between 41 to 60 years. w Pi .w CM Core Business Engineering Health Administrators 7? 20-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-65 AGE CATEGORY Figure 1. Age Categories of the Respondents i n Percentages Gender The sex d i s t r i b u t i o n for each faculty group i s summarized i n Table 5. Although approximately one-quarter of the faculty were female, a l l of the engineering respondents and 98.1 percent of business respondents were male. In contrast, almost 90 percent of the health faculty were female. The core faculty more nearly reflected the o v e r a l l percentages noted. TABLE 5 GENDER OF GROUPS IN PERCENTAGES Group a Male Female Core 79.5 20.5 Business 98.1 1.9 Engineering 100.0 0.0 Health 10.9 89.1 Total 73.8 26.2 Missing data 0 (0.0%) aGender of the administrators was not asked as i t was thought i t may jeopardize anonymity of the respondents. Description of Faculty i n Professional/ Technologist, Academic, and Teacher Dimensions Professional or Technologist Identity Work experiences, c e r t i f i c a t i o n s , upgrading a c t i v i t i e s , and ways of keeping i n contact with the profession or technology were compiled for the actual professional or technologist i d e n t i t y of the faculty groups. 40. Previous work experience. Respondents were asked to indicate the amounts and types of their previous work experiences related to the d i s c i p l i n e or technology they were currently teaching; summary of the data i s provided i n Table 6. The most frequent type of previous work experience for a l l groups was practicing professional. Proportionately more of engineering faculty (30.3.:percent) had technician or technologist experience than did the other groups. Business faculty had the highest percentage (20.0) with consultant experience. Less than 2 percent of faculty were students with no work experience prior to joi n i n g the I n s t i t u t e . TABLE 6 PREVIOUS WORK EXPERIENCES IN THE DISCIPLINE OR TECHNOLOGY CURRENTLY TAUGHT BY FACULTY GROUPS IN PERCENTAGES Work experience Core Business Engineering Health Total A. Type 3 Technician or technologist 16.9 11.4 30.3 20.8 19.6 Practicing professional 41.5 35.2 38.2 44.4 39.3 Administrator or supervisor 18.5 31.4 19.1 25.0 24.2 Consultant 10.8 20.0 11.2 4.2 12.4 Student with no work experiences 3.1 1.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 Not applicable 9.2 1.0 1.1 4.2 3.3 Amount None 5.1 1.9 0.0 2.2 2.1 Less than 1 year 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 to 2 years 20.5 1.9 1.9 13.0 8.4 3 to 5 years 30.8 13.5 16.7 15.2 18.3 6 to 10 years 23.1 32.7 18.5 30.4 26.2 11 years or more 20.5 50.0 63.0 39.1 45.0 Missing data 0 (0.0%) Respondents instructed to check a l l options that applied to them. For a l l except core, the modal length of work experience was 11 years or more. Of the engineering group 63 percent had 11 or more years experience. In comparison to the other groups, greater proportions of core faculty had 1 to 2 years or no previous experience. C e r t i f i c a t i o n . Respondents were asked to indicate t h e i r highest tech-nological or professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n . Confusion at>out the meaning of c e r t i f i c a t i o n was evident as some respondents specified "degree" for "other" rather than "basic" or "advanced c e r t i f i c a t i o n " as intended. Consequently, degree was added as a category for analysis. Inspection of the data, seen i n Table 7, shows that basic professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n was the modal c e r t i f i c a t i o n for a l l groups except core. For core, i t was degrees. S l i g h t l y less than one-third of core and business f a c u l t i e s checked "not applicable." TABLE 7 HIGHEST LEVEL OF TECHNOLOGICAL OR PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION BY PERCENTAGES OF FACULTY GROUPS C e r t i f i c a t i o n Core Business Engineering Health Total Basic prof, or tech. cert. 22.2 50.0 63.0 47.8 47.8 Basic trade cert. 2.8 0.0 1.9 0.0 1.1 Advanced trade cert. 2.8 0.0 7.4 0.0 2.7 Advanced prof, or tech. cert. 2.8 6.0 20.4 23.9 14.0 Degree 3 30.6 16.0 3.7 28.3 18.3 Other 8.3 0.0 1.9 0.0 2.2 Not applicable 30.6 28.0 1.9 0.0 14.0 Missing data 5 (2.6%) 3Degree category added for analysis as s l i g h t l y less than on e - f i f t h of faculty reported degree i n the "other (please specify)" category. 42. Upgrading a c t i v i t i e s . Two classes of a c t i v i t i e s which could be used to upgrade or broaden technological and professional a b i l i t i e s were examined. The f i r s t included short term a c t i v i t i e s while the second required longer periods of time (to complete the p a r t i c u l a r a c t i v i t y ) . Table 8 summarizes the extent of faculty p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n f i v e short term a c t i v i t i e s . The largest majority (86 percent or more) of each group attended conferences or workshops, and read journals, magazines, or publications of a professional or technological nature. Of those who engaged i n these two a c t i v i t i e s , health had proportionately more faculty who attended one or more conferences a year and read each issue, i n contrast to core which had proportionately more faculty attending only one conference every 3 or more years and reading some issues. For business and engineering, the most frequent responses were attending one or more conferences a year and reading most issues. The majority of business and engineering f a c u l t i e s (60.8 and 73.6 percent respectively) spent short amounts of time i n industry, business, and health care organizations during non-teaching t i m e — i n contrast to the minority of core and health f a c u l t i e s (48.7 and 42.2 percent respec-t i v e l y ) . The most common frequency of t h i s a c t i v i t y was every year except for core which was every 3 years. The minority of each group reported having taken university courses which were not credited toward a degree or credential, since jo i n i n g the In s t i t u t e . Comparing the groups, core had the largest proportion, 42.1 percent, who had taken courses versus 34..0 percent of engineering and roughly one-quarter of the health and business groups. The modal frequency of those taking such courses was one or more courses a year for business and health f a c u l t i e s , i n contrast to one course every 3 or more years for core and engineering. TABLE 8 43. SHORT TERM PROFESSIONAL UPGRADING ACTIVITIES: PERCENTAGES OF FACULTY GROUPS Upgrading a c t i v i t y 3 Core Business Engineering Health Total A. Attended prof, or 89 .7b 86.5 94.4 95.6 91.6 tech. conferences or workshops 1 or more a year 48.6 62.2 66.7 86.0 66. 7 1 every 2 years 31.4 26.7 25.5 11.6 23. 6 1 every 3 or 20.0 11.1 7.8 2.3 9. 8 more years B. Read prof, or 100 .0 98.0 100.0 100.0 99.5 tech. journals each issue 10.5 30.0 25.0 43.5 28. 0 most issues 31.6 48.0 46.2 26.1 38. 7 some issues 57.9 22.0 28.8 30.4 33. 3 C. Short time i n 48 .7 60.8 73.6 42.2 57.4 organizations during breaks every year 36.8 83.9 46.2 63.2 58. 3 every 2 years 21.1 6.5 23.1 21.1 17. 6 every 3 or 42.1 9.7 30.8 15.8 24. 1 more years D. University courses 42 .1 28.0 34.0 21.7 31.0 not toward degree 1 or more a year 25.0 66.7 16.7 50.0 37. 3 1 every 2 years 31.3 13.3 27.8 10.0 22. 0 1 every 3 or 43.8 20.0 55.6 40.0 40. 7 more years E. Post-secondary 27 .0 45.8 54.7 41.3 43.5 courses not toward degree 1 or more a year 20.0 27.3 34.5 26.3 28. 8 1 every 2 years 10.0 13.6 17.2 21.1 16. 3 1 every 3 or 70.0 59.1 48.3 52.6 55. 0 more years Missing data 19 (2.0%) aThe question asking i f any other ' short term, ad hoc professional < or technological upgrading or broadening a c t i v i t i e s had been undertaken was deleted as the respondents ' most frequent categories of answers were tested i n subsequent questions. ^Percentage indicates yes response. With regard to courses taken at colleges, or other non-university, post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s which were not credited toward a degree or credential, there were notable differences among the faculty groups. Only 27 percent of core i n contrast to roughly 50 percent (ranging from 41.3 to 54.7 percent) of the other groups, reported taking such courses since jo i n i n g the I n s t i t u t e . For a l l groups the most common frequency was one course every 3 or more years. The percentages of the faculty groups for the f i v e long term upgrading a c t i v i t i e s are shown i n Table 9. Writing a manual, text, or book was under-taken by approximately one-fifth of a l l faculty groups. Over twice as many of the core and engineering f a c u l t i e s (18.0 and 19.4 percent respectively) as business and health f a c u l t i e s (7.0 and 7.8 percent respectively), were writing technical or professional papers. An educational sabbatical was taken by roughly one-tenth of core faculty versus approximately one-twentieth of each of the other three groups. Approximately 25 percent of business faculty, and one-fifth of each of the other groups undertook a degree or diploma program on a part-time basis. Considered together, 27.9 percent of faculty engaged i n higher education. Approximately 6 percent of health, 10 percent of core and business, and 15 percent of engineering faculty had taken professional development leaves of absence. Over twice as many health faculty either have not done any of these a c t i v i t i e s , or saw i t as not applicable to themselves i n comparison to the other groups. Contact with the profession or technology. As shown i n Table 10, there were generally small differences among the faculty groups for the various ways of maintaining contact with the i r profession or technology. The one exception was the core faculty where approximately one-quarter as many (2.7 percent) served on professional or technological committees outside the Institute as compared to the other groups. TABLE 9 LONG TERM PROFESSIONAL UPGRADING OR BROADENING ACTIVITIES: PERCENTAGES OF FACULTY GROUPS A c t i v i t y 3 Core Business .Engineering Health Total Professional development leave of absence 13.1 9.9 15.1 5.9 11.6 Educational sabbatical 11.5 7.0 6.5 3.9 7.2 Part-time degree or diploma program 19.7 26.8 16.1 21.6 20.7 Writing technical or professional paper 18.0 7.0 19.4 7.8 13.8 Writing manual, text, or book 19.7 16.9 20.4 15.7 18.5 Have not engaged i n any a c t i v i t i e s / n o t 14.7 12.7 11.9 37.2 17.4 applicable* 3 Missing data 0 (0.0%) Note: The sum of the percentages for each group may not t o t a l 100 as respondents were asked to check a l l options that , applied to them. a"0ther (please specify)" category was deleted because answers given were asked for i n other questions. These options were collapsed because only 2.2 percent of faculty checked "not applicable", and the meanings of the options were s i m i l a r . The two most frequent ways of maintaining contact were: informal discussions with others, and membership i n professional or technological associations. Serving on professional or technological committees outside the Institute was used least common. TABLE 10 USUAL WAYS FACULTY KEEP IN CONTACT WITH THEIR PROFESSION OR TECHNOLOGY Ways3 Core Business Engineering Health Total Informal discussions with faculty, professionals, or technologists 25.0 20.6 18.3 18.6 20.2 Membership i n professional or technological associations.!. 16.2 17.1 20.0 18.6 18.2 Attend meetings of association or society 11.5 14.9 12.9 13.0 13.2 Serve on professional or technical committees outside the In s t i t u t e 2.7 8.3 10.0 11.3 8.6 Other/not applicable^ 4.1 2.6 2.5 2.1 2.7 Missing data 0 (0.0%) Note: The sum of the percentages for each group may not t o t a l 100 as respondents were asked to check a l l options that applied to them. aTwo options, previously tested and presented as data i n Table 8, were deleted from this Table. t>These options were collapsed as 1 , percent of faculty checked "not applicable." Consulting or part-time work i s another way to maintain contact with a profession or technology. As shown i n Table 11 there were differences i n the proportions of the groups engaging i n such work. Approximately 67 and 54 percent of the business and engineering f a c u l t i e s respectively had done consulting or part-time work; i n contrast, less than 32 percent of core and 7 percent of health took part i n t h i s form of a c t i v i t y . The usual amount of time spent consulting was between 1 ' and 20 percent of t o t a l time worked per week. TABLE 11 PERCENTAGE OF TIME WORKED PER WEEK IN CONSULTING BY FACULTY GROUPS Percentage of time consulting Core Business Engineering Health Total 31.6 a 67.3 53.7 6.8 42.0 1 to 20 100.0 91.4 100.0 ..100.0 96.2 21 to 40 0.0 8.6 0.0 0.0 3.8 41 to 100 b 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Missing data 3 (1.6%) Percentages i n th i s row indicate those responding "yes" to consulting or part-time work. ^Three categories were collapsed into one because none of the respondents checked them. Academic Identity To ascertain the academic i d e n t i t y of the four faculty groups, two variables were examined: f i r s t l y , t h e i r highest educational attainment; and secondly, the frequency of their engaging i n research a c t i v i t i e s . The data are' summarized i n Tables 12 and 13 respectively. Academic credentials. The most common academic credential for health,; core,, and'engineering f a c u l t i e s was a bachelor degree: (seeTTable 12). A master degree was the most common degree for business faculty (40.4 per-c e n t ) — i n contrast to 30.8 percent for core, 27.8 percent for engineering, and none for health faculty. Only three faculty possessed a doctoral degree, a l l of whom belonged to the core d i v i s i o n . Very few faculty indicated they possessed two bachelor or master 'degrees. Only 2.6 percent (one respondent) 48. TABLE 12 ACADEMIC CREDENTIALS OF FACULTY GROUPS Highest Educational Attainment Core Business Engi- .-neeririg Health Total Less than Grade XII 0 (0.0) 1 (1.9) 1 (1.9) 1 (2.2) 3 (1.6) Secondary school diploma 0 (0.0) 4 (7.7) 1 (1.9) 1 (2.2) 6 (3.1) One year post-secondary diploma 0 (0.0) 1 (1.9) 1 (1.9) 0 (0.0) 2 (1.0) Some college or university 1 (2.6) 4 (7.7) 2 (3.7) 9 (19.6) 16 (8.4) Two or three years post-secondary diploma 0 (0.0) 5 (9.6) 10 (18.5) 5 (10.9) 20 (10.5) One bachelor degree 18 (46.2) 10 (19.2) 18 (33.3) 27 (58.7) 73 (38.2) Two or more bachelor degrees 3 (7.7) 4 (7.7) 4 (7.4) 2 (.4.3) 13 (6.8) One master degree 12 (30.8) 21 (40.4) " 15 (27.8) 0 (0.0) 48 (25.1) Two or more master degrees 2 (5.1) 2 (3.8) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 4 (2.1) One doctoral degree 3 (7.7) 0 (0.0) 0 C0.0) 0 (0.0) 3 (1.6) Two or more doctoral degrees 0 (0.0) 0 (.0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) Other 0 (0.0) 0 (.0.0) 2 (3.7) 1 (2.2) 3 (1.6) Total 191 (100.0) Missing data 0 (0.0%) of core reported having less than a bachelor degree. This i s i n consider-able contrast to the other three groups (business, 28.8; engineering, 27.9; and health, 34.9jpercent). Research A c t i v i t i e s . As shown i n Table 13, the four faculty groups generally did not engage i n research a c t i v i t i e s to any extent. The major-i t y of a l l groups (ranging from 74.4 percent for core to 84.8 percent for health) engaged i n such a c t i v i t i e s only "occasionally", "infrequently", or;"never." TABLE 13 FREQUENCY OF RESEARCH ACTIVITIES OF FACULTY GROUPS Frequency Core Business Engineering Health Total Very often 3 (7.7) 3 (5.8) 1 (1.9) 0 (0.0) 7 (3.7) Frequently 7 (17.9) 7 (13.5) 7 (13.5) 7 (15.2) 28 (14.8) Occasionally 9 (23.1) 15 (28.8) 12 (23.1) 11 (23.9) 47 (24.9) Infrequently 11 (28.2) 12 (23.1) 15 (28.8) 8 (17.4) 46 (24.3) Never 9 (23.1) 15 (28.8) 17 (32.7) 20 (43.5) 61 (32.3) Total 189 (100.0) Missing data 2 (1.1%) 50. Core faculty had the highest percentages who engaged "very often" (7.7 percent) and "frequently" (17.9 percent) i n research a c t i v i t i e s . Health faculty differed from the other groups by having none "very often" doing research and the highest proportion (43.5 percent) indicating they were "never" s i m i l a r l y involved. Teacher Identity Four areas were examined to ascertain the teacher i d e n t i t y of faculty groups. These were: teaching experience, in s t r u c t i o n or education topics taken i n credit courses, assistance i n teaching preparation and ins t r u c t i o n , and l e v e l of education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n . Teaching experience. The amount of time spent teaching p r i o r to joi n i n g the I n s t i t u t e and the various levels taught are summarized i n Table 14. With the exception of core faculty, the most common l e v e l taught was the technological or technical l e v e l (19.0 percent of engineering, 25.8 percent of business, and 42.0 percent of health). University teaching was the modal response (33.9 percent) for core. The next most common l e v e l of experience, for business and engineering f a c u l t i e s , was university teaching (12.9 and 13.8 percent respectively); for core i t was senior secondary teaching (17.9 percent), and for health i t was college teaching (8.0 percent). Core faculty had the largest proportions with previous teaching experience at the ele-mentary or junior secondary le v e l s . Except for core, the largest proportions of the faculty groups indicated they had no teaching experience prior to joi n i n g the Institute—percentages ranged from 37.0 to 48.1. For core, the faculty were distributed almost equally between no experience, 1 to 2 years, and 3 to 5 years (approximately 25 percent for each category). Of the business and engineering groups with previous experience, the largest amounts ranged from less than 1 year to 5 51. TABLE 14 LEVEL AND AMOUNT OF PREVIOUS TEACHING EXPERIENCE OF FACULTY GROUPS IN PERCENTAGES Previous Teaching Experience Core Business Engineering Health Total A. L e v e l a Elementary or Junior Secondary 10.7 4.8 1.7 4.0 5.3 Senior Secondary 17.9 3.2 6.9 0.0 7.1 Vocational or Trade 1.8 8.1 5.2 2.0 4.4 Technological or technical 3.6 25.8 19.0 42.0 22.1 College 14.3 8.1 6.9 8.0 9.3 University 33.9 12.9 13.8 6.0 16.8 Not applicable 17.9 37.1 46.6 38.0 35.0 B. Amount*3 No teaching experience 23.1 40.4 48.1 37.0 38.2 Less than 1 year 12.8 28.8 9.3 13.0 16.2 1 to 2 years 25.6 13.5 18.5 6.5 15.7 3 to 5 years 23.1 13.5 18.5 21.7 18.8 6 to 10 years 7.7 1.9 0.0 13.0 5.2 11 years or more 7.7 1.9 5.6 8.7 5.8 Missing data 0 (0.0%) Respondents instructed to check a l l options that applied. 'All respondents instructed to indicate their amount of teaching experience. 52. years. Health faculty's experience differed from the others, being more evenly distributed from less than 1 year to 11 years or more. Instruction or education topics. Generally the groups appear similar i n the topics i n instruction and education taken for credit at a university or college. The most frequently taken topics were i n s t r u c t i o n a l objectives and teaching techniques—'the average for a l l faculty being approximately 14 percent for both topics (see Table 15). The least popular topics taken by the f a c u l t i e s were characteristics of technological, vocational, and career students, and diagnosis of learning and teaching problems. TABLE 15 TOPICS TAKEN IN CREDIT COURSES IN INSTRUCTION BY FACULTY GROUPS IN PERCENTAGES Topics Core Business Engineering Health Total Theories of learning applied to adults 9.7 11.9 11.6 9.7 10.7 Instructional objectives 16.8 11.9 13.2 14.9 14.2 Preparation, use of course outlines 11.5 11.0 10.9 14.2 11.9 Construction, assessment of tests,' exams 13.3 6.8 7.8 12.7 10.1 Teaching techniques 16.8 14.4 14.0 13.4 14.6 Selection, development, use of audio-visual aids 8.0 7.6 8.5 9.7 8.5 Diagnosis of learning, teaching problems 2.7 4.2 3.1 3.0 3.2 Philosophy, objectives of post-sec. i n s t i t . 8.8 6.8 5.4 5.2 6.5 Characteristics of tech. voc. and career students 1.8 3.4 2.3 2.2 2.4 Other 1.8 0.8 4.7 0.7 2.0 None taken 8.8 21.2 18.6 14.2 15.8 Missing data 0 (0.0%) Note: Respondents asked to check a l l options that applied, Instructional assistance. Respondents were asked i f they had received assistance i n teaching preparation and inst r u c t i o n . The r e s u l t s , summarized i n Table 16, show that over 80 percent of business and engineering, and approximately 60 percent of core, and 50 percent of health had taken a short, inservice teaching preparation course. TABLE 16 ASSISTANCE RECEIVED BY FACULTY GROUPS IN TEACHING PREPARATION AND INSTRUCTION Type Core Business Engineering Health Total Inservice course 59.5 84.3 83.3 50.0 70.7 Experienced faculty member or teacher 47.4 (15.8) 63.5 (5.8) 46.3 (3.7) 31.1 (6.7) 47.6 (7.4) Missing data: Inservice course 3 (1.6%); Experienced faculty member or teacher 2 (1.1%) Note: Percentages i n parentheses indicate "undecided" responses. In response to the question, had they received assistance i n inst r u c t i o n and teaching preparation by an experienced faculty member or teacher during thei r f i r s t year of teaching, approximately 47 percent of core and engineering f a c u l t i e s replied affirmatively (see Table 16). These percentages differed considerably from those of the-health and business groups, where approximately 31 and 64 percent respectively received t h i s help. Teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n . Table 17 shows the percentage d i s t r i b u t i o n of faculty groups by their highest l e v e l of education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n . For a l l groups, the largest percentage of respondents reported they did not have an education degree or teaching c e r t i f i c a t e . Of the four groups, health and, to a lesser extent, core had proportionately more faculty with Profes-sional C e r t i f i c a t e s and/or Bachelor of Education Degrees. Less than 16 percent of faculty reported other types of c e r t i f i c a t i o n or education degrees. TABLE 17 HIGHEST LEVEL OE EDUCATION OR TEACHING CERTIFICATION OF FACULTY IN PERCENTAGES C e r t i f i c a t i o n Level Core Business Engineering Health Total None 65.8 80.4 78.4 50.0 69.6 Teaching Licence 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 Instructor's Diploma 0.0 7.8 3.9 9.1 5.4 Standard C e r t i f i c a t e 2.6 0.0 3.9 2.3 2.2 Professional c e r t i f i c a t e and/or Bach, of Ed. Degree 18.4 5.9 3.9 34.1 14.7 Master Degree of Education 5.3 2.0 3.9 0.0 2.7 Doctoral Degree of Education 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other 5.3 3.9 5.9 4.5 4.9 Missing data 7 (3.7%) Composite of the Three Identity Dimensions Faculty were asked to specify the approximate percentages of time they spent during the "ten month duty year" i n teaching, academic, and profes-sional/technologist a c t i v i t i e s . The means and standard deviations for each group are presented i n Table 18. As shown i n Table 18, the greatest proportion of time was spent i n teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s by a l l groups (percentages ranged between 75.46 and 84.64). For the other two dimensions the ranges were: 7.14 to 55. 12.26 percent for time spent i n academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s ; and 8.21 to 14.13 percent for professional/technologist a c t i v i t i e s . TABLE 18 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS: ACTUAL PERCENTAGE OF TIME SPENT IN TEACHING, ACADEMIC, AND PROFESSIONAL OR TECHNOLOGIST ACTIVITIES BY FACULTY GROUPS Group Teaching Variable' Academic Prof. /Tech. Core (C) 79. 23 12. 26 8. 51 (13. 29) (10. 46) (6. 87) Business (B) 75. 46 10. 46 14. 08 (14. 75) (8. 59) (10. 57) Engineering (E) "76. 52 9. 35 14. 13 (14. 62) (8. 66) (12. 77 Health (H) 84. (14. 64 14) 7. (7. 14 14) 8. (9. 21 13) H> . B C > • B H > E C > • E H > B H > E Missing data 6 (3.1%) Notes: Parentheses indicates standard deviation. For vocabulary, H>B means that the mean time spent i n teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s by health faculty was s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p < .05) greater than the mean time spent by business faculty. Within each dimension one way analysis of variance was performed to determine the significance ( s t a t i s t i c a l ) of the differences among the means i n Table 18. These results are summarized i n Table 19. Significant differences existed i n the teaching and professional/technologist dimensions. Scheffe's multiple comparisons t e s t , summarized at the bottom of Table 18, showed business and engineering f a c u l t i e s differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y from health faculty i n mean amounts of time spent i n teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s (75.46 and 76.52 percent versus 84.64 percent respectively). With regard to the proportion of time spent i n professional/technologist a c t i v i t i e s , the core and health groups differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y from the business and engineering groups (8.51 percent and 8.21 percent versus 14.08 and 14.13 percent respec-t i v e l y ) . TABLE 19 ONE WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE: ACTUAL PERCENTAGE OF TIME SPENT IN TEACHING, ACADEMIC, AND PROFESSIONAL OR TECHNOLOGIST ACTIVITIES BY FACULTY GROUPS Source of V a r i a b i l i t y df MS F A. Teaching Between 3 :i7 4.73* Within 181 .04 B. Academic Between 3 .07 2.18 Within 181 .03 C. Prof./Tech. Between 3 .16 6.24* Within 181 .03 Missing data 6 (3.1%) * p < . 05 "Desirable" Characteristics and A c t i v i t i e s for Faculty as Perceived by Faculty Groups and Administrators Professional or Technologist Identity The respondents were asked to indicate the d e s i r a b i l i t y of professional or technologist characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s for faculty. Five areas were investigated to determine i f there were s i g n i f i c a n t differences among the core, business, engineering, health, and administrators groups. These were: amounts of related work experience, l e v e l of c e r t i f i c a t i o n , upgrading or broadening a c t i v i t i e s , ways of maintaining contact with the profession or technology, and consulting or part-time work. The data are summarized i n Tables 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24. Related work experience. With the exception of 2.6 percent of core faculty, a l l respondents of the f i v e groups saw some work related experience as desirable for newly hired faculty (see Table 20). The greatest proportions of core (59 percent), engineering (45.3 percent), and health (69.6 percent) f a c u l t i e s indicated 3 to 5 years of work experience related to the technology or courses taught as most desirable. Both business (48.1 percent) and administrators (51.5 percent) groups f e l t 6 to 10 years was most desirable. In t o t a l , the two categories of 3 to 5 years and 6 to 10 years, comprised an average percentage of 84.6 (varying from 74.4 for core to 93.9 for administrators) of a l l respondents. 58. TABLE 20 AMOUNTS OF WORK EXPERIENCE RELATED TO THE TECHNOLOGY OR COURSES TAUGHT PERCEIVED AS MOST DESIRABLE FOR NEWLY HIRED FACULTY Amount of work experience Core Business Engineering Health Administrators None needed 2.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Less than 1 year 2.6 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 to 2 years 12.8 3.8 1.9 13.0 0.0 3 to 5 years 59.0 32.7 45.3 69.6 42.4 6 to 10 years 15.4 48.1 41.5 17.4 51.5 11 years or more 7.7 13.5 11.3 0.0 6.1 Missing data 1 (0.4%) Level of c e r t i f i c a t i o n . Respondents were asked their opinion of the minimal l e v e l of professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n desirable for faculty. For a l l except core, the greatest proportions of respondent groups (as shown i n Table 21), thought "basic professional or technological c e r t i -f i c a t i o n or diploma" to be the minimal desirable l e v e l of c e r t i f i c a t i o n (administrators, 74.2; engineering, 72.2; business, 46; and health, 45.7 percent). In contrast, only 17.9 percent of core thought so. The majority of the core faculty was divided between the "degree" and "not applicable" categories (38.5 and 30.8 percent respectively). S i m i l a r l y , approximately one-third of business faculty checked "not applicable" (32 percent). Roughly one-fifth of both the administrators and health groups indicated "advanced professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n . " Almost one-quarter of health faculty thought a degree was desirable. TABLE 21 MINIMAL LEVEL OF PROFESSIONAL OR TECHNOLOGICAL CERTIFICATION DESIRABLE FOR FACULTY Level of c e r t i f i c a t i o n Core Business Engineering Health Administrators Basic prof, or tech. cert. or diploma 17.9 46.0 72.2 45.7 74.2 Basic trade cert. 0.0 2.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 Advanced trade cert. 5.1 2.0 1.9 4.3 0.0 Advanced prof, or tech. cert. 2.6 4.0 11.1 21.7 19.4 Degree 3 38.5 12.0 1.9 23.9 3.2 Other 5.1 2.0 3.7 4.3 0.0 Not applicable 30.8 32.0 7.4 0.0 3.2 Missing data 4 (1.8%) aDegree category added for analysis as roughly f o u r - f i f t h s of the respondents reported (degree i n the "other (please specify)" category. Upgrading or broadening a c t i v i t i e s . The perceived usefulness of 10 a c t i v i t i e s faculty may engage i n to upgrade or broaden thei r technological or professional a b i l i t i e s were rated using a Likert (Helmstadter, 1970, p. 448) scale of 1, "very useful", through 5, "no use." Data pertaining to a l l 10 a c t i v i t i e s are summarized i n Table 22. The groups expressed similar opinions regarding the perceived "useful-ness" of attending conferences and work shops for the purpose of upgrading or broadening the i r technological or professional a b i l i t i e s . The groups' mean responses centered around 2 indicating i t as "useful" (means ranged from 1.74 for health to 2.36 for core f a c u l t y ) . 60. Co H- 5 3 3 » p - r t co CD r t i-S ri1 x> CD i-i cm rt) 3 rr oo 3* n rn co co >-( co 3 r t 3 rt H co rr^ <! oo CD CO CD H i f x H-3 H-r t . C S! CU CD ro i-j 3 3 3 Co g oo cr 3 O A (t> If H- 3 3 ° S r t CT 3* H- CD CD 3 ri o r t CD 0) Co i-i CD 3 r t D* CD CO H-05 H> 3 D-P -O CO r t CD CO CO rt Co 3 CX CD H O-P-. CD < CO r t H-O 3 s CO co H-3 00 Cu Co r t Co tO g CD 3 O Q. 3 o H- i-S rf co CO <! r t r t o H- H- o 3 3 CO 00 00 a4 c r t rt) h-1 IT O Co CD r-t O o v* o CO i-S DS ra CD A o r t i n r t CO CD o g rt 3 CD H- P CO r t 3 r t V ! CO H* . o r t CO 3* H CO o CO r t i-i ?r H- r t CO 3 ST n 00 CD H- (0 g <! 3 CD H- ^ CO r t 3 r t K i-i o CO CD r t i-i g H* o CD 3 CD Co OQ 3 < CO rt i CD O Cu H- r j 3 (O CO o CD o Co g g h-1 o X) r t l-t CO rr CD i-i rt i c CO Co CO o o CD 3 c t-h M C H- r t h-1 CO > a. g H-3 H-CO 'I EG CD CO r-' r t 3 " LO vo ;3 M CD 3. rCD 'OO r i ; M* H- VI -.3 Us.' OQ : ' 4> vo W 3 CD H-3 CD CO CO o> vo o 00 vo VO ~J vo 4> 00 O VO 00 n n A A > PI 00 VO t - M 4>- 4>- Vjl VO - J Ln O 00 VO VO LO 4> LO ON 4> 00 U i LO Ln ~J LO 4>- LO CO - -J vo vo tO CO IO ON M VO ON ON 4S Ln 4 S M 00 4> 4> ON VO ON O 4> ON 4S 00 VO 00 U> M O M 00 S3 t o vo Lo Ln L n Ln LO O O 4>- 00 00 -P -VD VO M 4> LO M O 4> ~ J ON o co LO 4> vo I—' I—' 00 O 4> 4> o o rj CD LO ON O h - 1 CO LO O ~-J LO ON vo vo O l 4>-I—' - J OOVO O O N C O ^ J O l i > t O O N O N ^ J L O C O r->~-J 00 Vn O O l -~J-~J 0 0 ~ ^ * » v o h - ' t o Lo Ln VO CO ON ON VO ON ON h-1 VO ON O r-" 00 Ln Ln O h- 1 00 CT> •P- ON LO J> /-*v 1—1 t o r-1 IO M t o /~\ t o VO LO ^ ' LO VO r-1 M v ' t o LO h-' t o 4 ^ LO h-1 Ln - — ' M VO Ln LO r-1 ^—\ M 1—1 , N h-1 —^N r-1 r-1 1—' O LO ^—' VO 4> VO Ln ON oo O l VO o oo v ' oo o 00 4> ~J U l oo t o CO -P -ON 00 -F- - O t o M t o t o '—s t o t o vO CO t o - o O o — ' 4> VO (IT' ON LO VO oo 1—1 VO t o *—' ON vO ^ t o ^ N t o t o ' — N M t o s—s IO 00 Ln h-> 00 VO LO v ^ LO LO VO t o ^—' ON O ^—y LO VO Ln ON VO ^ N r-1 h-1 N3 t o N r-1 ' N t o <H VO Ln VO h-1 ON LO ON 00 VD O O 00 4 ^ - o O - o VD •—y O ON Conferences or workshops Journals, magazines or publications Courses at university not toward credential Courses at colleges not toward credential Short amounts of time i n industry Professional develop-ment leave of absence Educational leave of absence Part-time degree or diploma program Writing technical or professional paper Writing manual, text, or book Informal discussions Membership i n associations Attend meetings of association or society Professional or tech-nological committees en X) oo i-i Co Cu H-3 00 o r j cr i-t o co a. CD 3 H» 3 00 Co n r t CD CO •ti.1 S I-i CO o H-i-h 3 CD r t 01 Co CO H-H - 3 O H-3 3 00 o i-i O O r t 3 CD r t O CO & O 3 r t O h-1 t, O H-OO r t ^ P' n 3 o oo 3 CO c It-M n O IT* o n M C/3 H O > tr) a m cn C/3 CO > o r 1 cn > s n H o PS S2 < H CO > H i-3 H M n o > n H3 W CO C/2 > t o t o w < C/l fD CO o r t i-i c c H- l-i fD £U o fD CT fD 3 H- CO h-1 H' o r t M l s cr\ ft 3 CO rt i M r t < Co r-i • H-CO Co r t * fD Conferences or Workshops Journals, magazines,' or publications Courses at university not toward credential Courses at colleges not toward credential Short amounts of time i n industry Professional develop-ment leave of absence Educational leave of absence Part-time degree or diploma program Writing technical or professional paper Writing manual, text, or book Informal discussions Membership i n associations Attend meetings of association or society Professional or tech-nological committees a 13 OQ i-t Co ft H-3 OQ O H c r H O Co ft fD 3 H-3 OQ Co o r t < r t H -fD CO o S Co H-3 r t Co H-3 i H -3 OQ o o 3 r t P ' O ,c=l 3 < Co H H-Co r t fD Co r t H* CO r t H-O CD 3 JQ n o 3 co C 62. S i m i l a r l y , regularly reading professional or technological magazines or journals was seen as a "useful" a c t i v i t y by a l l groups. The means spanned from 1.74 (health faculty) to 2.15 (business f a c u l t y ) . Taking courses at university but not having them credited toward a degree or credential was perceived as "some use" by a l l groups. There was a small spread between the groups' means (2.67 for business and 2.96 for engineering). There was s i m i l a r i t y between the groups' means regarding courses taken at colleges, the I n s t i t u t e , or other post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s but not having them credited toward a degree or credential. They were seen as less "useful" an a c t i v i t y i n comparison to taking courses at a university. Mean ratings centered between 2.52 for business faculty (midway between "useful" and "some use") to 2.79 for the administrators (approximately "some use"). Spending short amounts of time (from 1 to 6 weeks) i n industry, busi-ness, or health care organizations during breaks, holidays, or 1 month unspecified duties was considered between a "very useful" and "useful" an a c t i v i t y by a l l groups. The means ranged from 1.33 for the administrators to 1.86 for core faculty. Professional development leaves of absence to gain experience i n business, engineering, health, and academic organizations was considered "very useful" by a l l groups. There was only a .40 spread between means (from 1.24 for administrators to 1.64 for health f a c u l t y ) . L A wide dispersal of opinion on the usefulness of educational leaves of absence for study purposes was evident. Core faculty's mean was roughly mid-way between "very useful" and "useful" (1.61), which differed s i g n i f i ^ -cantly (see Tables 22 and 23) from the engineering group's mean assessment of 2.35 and the administrators' mean of 2.55 (approximately half way between "useful" and "some use"). Undertaking a diploma or degree program on a part-time basis was regarded mid-way between "useful" and "some use" (mean of 2.50) by core faculty, and as "useful" (mean of 2.08) by health faculty. The groups' perceived usefulness of writing a technical or profes-sional paper appear sim i l a r . Mean responses ranged roughly between "useful" and "some use" by health faculty (mean of 2.46), to approximately "some use" by engineering faculty (mean of 2.84). The l a s t a c t i v i t y assessed was writing a manual, text, or book. There was a small range for the groups—between "some use" and "useful" as rated by engineering faculty (2.43) to approximately "useful" as indicated by health faculty (2.23). Maintaining contact with the profession or technology. Respondents were asked to rate the usefulness of four a c t i v i t i e s as ways they could keep i n contact with the i r profession or technology. F i r s t l y , as shown i n Table 22, informal discussions or v i s i t s with other faculty, professionals, or technologists was generally perceived as between "very useful" (mean of 1.56 for health faculty) to approximately "useful" (mean of 1.94 for the administrators). The mean ratings for membership i n professional or technological associations were very similar for the groups. Health faculty considered association membership as approximately "useful" (mean of 2.18) while both core and engineering f a c u l t i e s determined i t i t be between "useful" and "some use" (both with means of 2.47). 64. Similar assessment i n usefulness was given to attending meetings of association or societies. Means ranged from roughly "useful" by the administrators (2.27) to "some use" by core faculty (mean of 2.69). The fourth and l a s t a c t i v i t y considered was serving on professional or technological committees outside the I n s t i t u t e . Responses ranged between approximately "useful" by the administrators (mean of 2.18), to "some use" by the engineering group (mean of 2.76). Consulting or part-time work. As shown i n Tables 22 and 23, there were differences among the groups i n t h e i r perceived usefulness of consulting or part-time work as a method of faculty maintaining contact with t h e i r profession or technology. Business faculty indicated consulting as approx-imately "useful" (mean of 1.70), which differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y from health group's assessment between "useful" and "some use" (mean of 2.36). Respondents also estimated the percentage of time worked per week thought desirable for faculty to spend i n consulting or part-time work (see Table 24) . The modal response for a l l groups was i n the .' iL to 20 percent category: from 77.3 percent of health faculty to 90.9 percent of the administrators indicated t h i s percentage category as desirable. Proportions of a l l groups specified that no time should be spent i n consulting a c t i v i t i e s . However, only 1.9 percent of business thought so, i n contrast to 18.2 percent of health faculty. Academic Identity For the academic ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s , the administrators and the four faculty groups were asked to indicate th e i r opinions of: what should be the minimal, desirable, educational attainment for faculty to teach t h e i r course(s) or TABLE 24 CONSULTING OR PART-TIME WORK: PERCENTAGE OF TIME WORKED PER WEEK PERCEIVED AS DESIRABLE FOR FACULTY Percentage 3 of time Core Business Engineering Health Administrators None 5.3 !-9 11.1.. 18.2 9.1 1 to 20% 86.8 82.7 88.9 77.3 90.9 21 to 40% 7.9 13.5 0.0 4.5 0.0 81 to 100% 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Missing data 3 (1.3%) aThe categories of 41 to 60% and 61 to 80% were deleted from t h i s table as none of the respondents checked them. technology; and what they thought of faculty engaging i n research a c t i v i t i e s during non-teaching time. For th i s l a t t e r question a Likert (Helmstadter, 1970, p. 448) scale ranging from "very valuable" (1) to "no value" (5) was used. Tables 25, 26, and 27 contain the summary data for these two questions. Educational attainment. As shown i n Table 25, a bachelor degree was ' the modal response for a l l groups for the minimal desirable educational preparation for faculty. The percentages ranged from 84.6 percent of core faculty to 40.4 percent of business. For health, engineering, and the administrators, the next most frequent response was a 2 or 3 year post-secondary diploma (respectively, 22.2, 29.6, and 30.3 percent). For the core and business groups, possession of a master degree (12.8 and 23.1 percent respectively) was the next most common response. TABLE 25 MINIMAL DESIRABLE EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT BY FACULTY GROUPS AND ADMINISTRATORS Educational attainment 3 Core Business Engineering Health Administrators Secondary school 0 8 1 3 1 diploma 0.0 15.4 1.9 6.7 3.0 One year post- 0 0 3 1 0 secondary diploma 0.0 0.0 5.6 2.2 0.0 Some college or 1 7 6 5 1 university 2.6 13.5 11.1 11.1 3.0 Two or three year post secondary diploma 0 :0.0 4 7.7 16 29.6 10 22.2 10 30.3 Bachelor degree 33 84.6 21 40.4 24 44.4 24 53.3 20 60.6 Master degree 5 12.8 12 23.1 3 5.6 1 2.2 1 3.0 Other 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.9 1 2,2 0 0.0 Missing data 1 (0.004%) aLess than Grade XII or equivalent and doctoral or Ph.D. degree categories were deleted as none of the respondents checked them. Research a c t i v i t i e s . The means, standard deviations, and univariate analysis of variance for the groups' opinions of the value of research a c t i v i t i e s for faculty are presented i n Tables 26 and 27. As shown i n Table 26 there was agreement among the f i v e groups. The mean responses centered around 2 which indicates that research a c t i v i t i e s were considered "valuable" for faculty. TABLE 2 6 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS: VALUE OF RESEARCH ACTIVITIES BY FACULTY GROUPS AND ADMINISTRATORS Group n Research Activities Core ' 39 2 . Q 0 ( . 9 7 ) Business 5 2 1 . 8 8 ( . 7 6 ) Engineering 5 4 2 . 1 9 ( . 9 1 ) Health 4 5 1 . 9 8 ( . 8 7 ) Administrators 33 1 . 9 4 ( . 9 0 ) Missing data 1 ( 0 . 0 0 4 % ) Note: Parenthesis indicates standard deviation. TABLE 2 7 UNIVARIATE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE: VALUE OF RESEARCH ACTIVITIES BY FACULTY GROUPS AND ADMINISTRATORS Source of Variability df MS F Between 4 . 6 7 . 8 7 Within 2 1 8 . 7 7 Total 2 2 2 Teacher Identity Five areas were investigated to determine i f there were s i g n i f i c a n t differences among the f i v e groups for the iteaching. characteristics .and a c t i v i t i e s they perceived as desirable for faculty. These were: amount of teaching experience, credit courses and topics i n inst r u c t i o n or education, inservice teaching preparation courses, assistance i n instruction from an experienced faculty member during the f i r s t year of teaching, and the l e v e l of education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n or licencing. Each of these areas w i l l be considered i n turn. Teaching experience. As shown i n Table 28, the largest proportions of a l l faculty groups indicated 1 to 2 years of teaching experience as desirable for faculty to have before teaching at the In s t i t u t e . Percentages ranged from 40.5 percent (engineering) to 61.1 percent (health f a c u l t y ) . The most frequent response of the administrators, i n contrast to the faculty groups, was "no teaching experience" (39.3 percent). The next most.frequent response for a l l faculty groups was "no teaching experience" ranging from 19.4 percent of health faculty to 38.1 percent of engineering faculty; while for the administrators i t was 1 to 2 years of experience (32.1 percent). Credit courses i n inst r u c t i o n or education. For the groups' responses to the usefulness for faculty to take credit courses i n instruction or education at a college or university, a Likert (Helmstadter, 1970, p. 448) scale ranging from "very useful" (1) to "no use" (5) was used. As shown i n Table 29 there was agreement between the core, business, engineering, and administrators groups. These groups rated such courses between "useful" and "some use" (means centered around 2.6). However, the health group, TABLE 28 AMOUNTS OF TEACHING EXPERIENCE PERCEIVED DESIRABLE FOR FACULTY Amounts Core Business Engineering Health Administrators None 20.6 33.3 38.1 19.4 39.3 Less than 1 year 0.0 16.7 2.4 2.8 7.1 1 to 2 years 52.9 42.9 40.5 61.1 32.1 3 to 5 years 20.6 7.1 19.0 11.1 21.4 6 to 10 years 2.9 0.0 0.0 5.6 0.0 11 years or more 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Missing data 42 (18.8%). These data included respondents who either f a i l e d to respond or indicated they were undecided. which differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y (see Table 30) from the other three faculty groups and the administrators, considered such courses to be approximately "useful" (mean rating of 1.88). Next, the respondents were asked to s i g n i f y the usefulness of each of nine specified topics i n instruction or education taken i n such credit courses. The data pertaining to each of the topics are presented i n Tables-29-and 30. The topic of theories of learning applied to adults was s i m i l a r l y rated by the core, business, engineering, and administrators groups. The means ranged from 2.20 to 2.65, indicating the topic was considered approx-imately mid-way between "useful" (2) and "some use" (3). In contrast, the health faculty rated t h i s topic as "useful 1" Their mean (1.81) was s i g n i f i -cantly different from the mean ratings for the core and engineering groups (2.65 and 2.58 respectively). o TABLE 29 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS: DESIRABLE TEACHING CHARACTERISTICS AND ACTIVITIES BY FACULTY GROUPS AND ADMINISTRATORS Group n to co CO u 3 O o •H CD U U CO O •H CX o H <4-4 O CO 60 co c •H -H M 3 O t-i co cd ,e co s O co •H CO •U > CJ "H 3 4J t-l o 4J co CO t-) 3 X> I—I o CO co 0) 3 CO -H (-1 rH 3 4-> O 3 c_> o CO e o •H CO rt 3 H e co rt co X H Cd CO CO 60 3 3 cr •H -H X! 3 O X! rt o CO CO H H rt 3 CO •H > I o •H 3 CO e co rH X> T3 O 3 U rt PM 60 60 C 3 H -H 3 ,3 n a rt rt oj co J H Tj 3 rt >^  o CO o rH •H X! PM CD O CO CO •H 4-1 H 3 co a) T3 3 4-1 u co rt u o Core 37 2. 68 2. 65 2. 65 2. 59 2. 38 2 16 2. 68 2. 68 3. 16 2. 84 1. 92 1 95 (1. ID (1. 18) (1. 21) (1. 34) (1. 34) (1 24) (1. 25) (1. 16) (1. 21) (1. 04) (1. 01) (1 18) Business 49 2. 59 2. 20 1. 88 2. 14 2. 10 1 71 2. 35 2. 63 3. 24 2. 65 1. 31 1 57 (1. 02) (. 89) (. 86) (. 96) (. 98) ( 91) (1. 13) (1. 15) (1. 16) (1. 18) (. 58) ( 82) Engineering 50 2. 60 2. 58 2. 14 2. 12 1. 98 1 90 2. 38 2. 88 3. 50 3. 06 1. 54 1 72 (1. 16) (1. 03) (1. 16) (1. 04) (1. 04) ( 97) ..'('• 95) (1. 17) (1. 04) (1. 04) (• 73) ( 95) Health 43 1. 88 1. 81 1. 65 1. 63 1. 42 1 49 1. 67 2. 05 2. 47 2. 37 1. 60 1 58 (• 93) (1. 00) (• 87) (1. 02) (• 73) ( 83) (. 89) (1. ID (1. 12) (1. 07) (. 93) ( 91) Administrators 30 2. 50 2. 53 1. 93 1. 83 1. 83 2 13 2. 53 2. 67 3. 27 2. 90 1. 33 1 43 (• 82) (. 97) (1. 05) (. 83) (. 79) (1 11) (• 97) (1. 03) (1. 05) (1. 18) (• 61) ( 63) H <C H-<C H-<C H<C H<C H<C H <E H <B H<E B<C H <B H-<E H<B H<B H <E H<E H <E H<A H<A Missing data 15 (6.7%) Notes: Parenthesis indicates standard deviation. For vocabulary, H<C means that the mean rating for health faculty was s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p<.05) less than the mean rating for core faculty. Taking any two means i n comparison i s interpreted as the lower magnitude number indicating the characteristic or a c t i v i t y perceived as more useful, and the higher magnitude number indicating, less 1 useful. 71. A o Ui 2 H-01 CO H-3 TO ft 03 r t P H S3 w O ft! r t r t r t Co rr M fD 3 en VO CO o 00 -^ 1 tO O 4> 2 ft 3 00 Ml h-1 r t < Co S3 i-i • H» t o Co r t fD ft -C- M i t o t o VO Ul t o -p -U l co 4>-Ui -t> O Ul CO 00 ON o < co co o c r fD r t Credit courses Topics: Theories of Learning Instructional Objectives Course Outlines Tests or Examinations Teaching Techniques Audio-Visual Aids Learning and Teaching Problems Philosophy and Objectives Characteristics of Students Inservice Course Assistance i n Instruction & 3 < CO t-i H-Co CO r t Co r t H-CO r t H» o co o H 2 pd P H H co H n CO < M > r-3 > t-1 K! CO r-3 CO r-H w o CO rrj td > n ci t-H pa w PS M o O C 3 i-d co 2 co w r 1 w H M > o EC a M H a CO O H H O pa co > f M CO o 72. The business, engineering, and administrators groups rated i n s t r u c t i o n a l objectives as "useful" (groups' means ranged from 1.88 to 2.14). The core faculty saw i t as less "useful" (mean of 2.65), which differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y from the health faculty's rating between "very useful" and "useful" (mean of 1.65). The topic of preparation and use of course outlines was perceived as "useful" by the business, engineering, and administrators groups (means ranged from 1.83 for administrators to 2.14 for business f a u c l t y ) . Health faculty viewed the topic between "very useful" and "useful" (mean of 1.63) which differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y from core faculty who rated i t between "useful" and "some use" (mean of 2.59). For a l l groups except health f a c u l t y , construction and assessment of tests or examinations was viewed as a "useful" topic (means ranged from 1.83 for administrators to 2.38 for core f a c u l t y ) . Health faculty differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y from the core and business groups by perceiving the topic closer.to "very useful" (mean of 1.42). Selected teaching techniques, namely lecture, discussions, seminars, f i e l d t r i p s , lab sessions, and projects, was perceived as a "useful" topic (means centered around 2) to have by a l l groups except health. Health faculty rated i t as mid-way between "very useful" and "useful" (mean of 1.49). Core, business, engineering, and administrators considered the topic of selection, development, and use of audio-visual aids as between "useful" and "some use" (means ranged from 2.35 to 2.68). In contrast, health faculty differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y from a l l four groups by rating i t closer to "useful" with a mean of 1.67. There was general agreement that the topic of diagnosis of learning and teaching problems was of "some use" for faculty. Means ranged from 2.63 for business faculty to 2.88 for engineering. Health faculty's mean of 2.05, indicating "useful", was s i g n i f i c a n t l y different from the engineering group's mean. The topic of philosophy and objectives of post-secondary educational i n s t i t u t i o n s was generally viewed of lesser importance to faculty than the other topics. The health faculty rated i t between "useful" and "some use" (mean of 2.47) which differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y from the ratings between "some use" and " l i t t l e use" of the business, administrators, and engineering groups (means ranged from 3.24 to 3.50). The l a s t topic rated was characteristics of technological, vocational, and career students. Health faculty rated i t as "useful" (mean of 2.37) which s i g n i f i c a n t l y differed from the engineering faculty's rating of "some use" (3.06). Between these two groups, the other three had means that ranged from 2.65 to 2.90. Inservice teaching preparation course. Respondents were asked to rate the usefulness of a short (1 to 4 weeks), inservice, teaching preparation course where newly hired faculty, who lacked teaching experience, would have an opportunity to gain knowledge and give instruction under supervision (see Table 29). There were s i g n i f i c a n t differences (as shown i n Table 30) between the business faculty who perceived the course as "very useful" (mean of 1.31) and the core faculty who viewed i t as "useful" (mean of 1.92). The other groups' means ranged from 1.33 (administrators) to 1.60 (health). 74. Assistance i n ins t r u c t i o n . The groups held similar opinions about the u t i l i t y of instruction and teaching assistance provided by experienced faculty to newly hired faculty who lacked teaching experience during the i r (new faculty) f i r s t year of teaching. As shown i n Table 29, the means ranged between "very useful" and "useful" (administrators, 1.43) to "useful" (core faculty, 1.95). Education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n . The l a s t variable examined i n the teaching dimension, as shown i n Table 31, was the lowest l e v e l of education^ or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n the groups thought desirable for faculty to have. The largest proportions of a l l groups specified that "none" was needed. From 63.9 to 70.6 percent of the core, business, engineering, and adminis-trators groups indicated no c e r t i f i c a t i o n was needed; i n contrast, 31.1 percent of health f e l t t h i s way. The next most frequently selected l e v e l of c e r t i f i c a t i o n was an Instructors' Diploma for core, business, engineering, and administrators groups; while for health faculty i t was a Professional C e r t i f i c a t e and/or a Bachelor of Education Degree. V i r t u a l l y none of the respondents indicated a Master Degree of Education to be the lowest l e v e l of c e r t i f i c a t i o n desirable for faculty. Composite of the Three Identity Dimensions To provide a composite of the a c t i v i t i e s i n the three i d e n t i t y dimensions, respondents were instructed to write the percentages of time they f e l t faculty "should" spend i n teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s , academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s , and professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s over the "ten month duty year." The means and standard deviations for these data are shown i n Table 32. Table 33 has summary data from one way analysis of variance. 75. TABLE 31 LOWEST LEVEL OF EDUCATION OR TEACHING CERTIFICATION OR LICENCING DESIRABLE FOR FACULTY L e v e l 3 Core Business Engineering Health Administrators None needed 63.9 70.6 66.0 31.1 69.7 Teaching Licence 0.0 2.0 0.0 4.4 0.0 Instructors' Diploma 11.1 19.6 24.5 20.0 18.2 Standard C e r t i f i c a t e 5.6 0.0 0.0 4.4 0.0 Professional Cert, and/or B.Ed. Degree . 8.3 2.0 5.7 26.7 3.0 Master degree of Ed. (M.A. or M.Ed.) 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other 11.1 3.9 3.8 13.3 9.1 Missing data 6 (2.7%) 3Doctoral Degree of checked i t . Education category ' was deleted as none, .of the respondents The groups' means appear similar for the three dimensions. For teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s the administrators ' mean percentage of 75.00 was the highest while the business faculty's ; mean of 66.96 was the lowest. The administrators' mean percentage of 10.45 for academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s was the lowest i n contrast to the highest mean of 14.86 percent given by core faculty. F i n a l l y , for professional and technologist a c t i v -i t i e s , the business faculty's mean of 19.86 percent was the highest; whereas, the health group's mean of 12.80 percent was the lowest. 76. TABLE 32 MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR PERCENTAGE OF TIME FACULTY SHOULD SPEND IN TEACHING, ACADEMIC, AND PROFESSIONAL/TECHNOLOGIST ACTIVITIES BY FACULTY GROUPS AND ADMINISTRATORS Variable Group Teaching Academic Prof./Tech. Core 68.75 14.86 16.39 (17.70) (8.58) (16.20) Business 66.96 13.18 19.86 (17.44) (9.95) (13.47) Engineering 70.91 (15.04) 12.24 (9.10) 16.85^ (12.18) Health 73.82 (12.59) 13.38 (9.45) 12.80 (6.95) Administrators 75.00 (9.84) 10.45 (5.06) 14.70 (7.49) Missing data 5 (2.24%) Note: Parentheses indicates standard deviations. TABLE 33 ONE WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE: PERCENTAGE OF TIME FACULTY SHOULD SPEND IN TEACHING, ACADEMIC, AND PROFESSIONAL/TECHNOLOGIST ACTIVITIES BY FACULTY GROUPS AND ADMINISTRATORS Source of df MS V a r i a b i l i t y F A. Teaching Between 4 .0634 2.03 Within 214 .0312 B. Academic Between 4 .0294 1.30 Within 214 .0225 C. Prof./Tech. Between 4 .0547 2.22 Within 214 .0246 Comparison of Faculty Groups' Actual And Perceived "Desirable" Characteristics Professional or Technologist Identity For selected professional and technological variables, respondents were asked to i d e n t i f y both: (1) the characteristics they possessed and the a c t i v i t i e s which they engaged i n ; and (2) the characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s they considered to be desirable. Comparability of the data format enabled comparisons to be made i n three areas: extent of work experience, l e v e l of c e r t i f i c a t i o n , and percentage of time for consulting or part-time work. The data are summarized i n Tables 34, 35, and 36. Related work experiences. As shown i n Table 34, there were larger proportions of a l l faculty groups desiring 3 to 5 years of work experience related to the courses of technology taught than the proportions actually having t h i s amount. Health faculty had the largest difference i n percentages (actual, 15.2 versus desired, 69.6), while business faculty had the smallest (actual, 13.5 versus desired, 32.7). Proportionately more of business and engineering f a c u l t i e s desired 6 to 10 years of experience than actually possessed that amount (desirable percentages were 41.5 for engineering and 48.1 for business). The core and health groups' members had proportionately more with that amount than deemed i t as "most desirable." The four groups had higher "actual" than "desired" proportions for 11 years or more experience. (The largest difference i n percentages was for engineering—actual, 63.0 versus desired, 11.3; and the smallest difference was for c o r e — a c t u a l , 20.5 versus desired, 7.7.) 78. TABLE 34 ACTUAL AND DESIRED EXTENT OF WORK EXPERIENCE RELATED TO THE TECHNOLOGY OR COURSES TAUGHT OF NEWLY HIRED FACULTY Core Business Engineering Health Extent n(act) =39 n(act)=52 n(act)=54 n(act)=46 n(des) =39 n(des)=52 n(des)=53 n(des)=46 None actual desired 5.1 2.6 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2 0.0 Less than 1 year actual desired 0.0 2.6 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 - 2 years actual desired 20.5 12.8 1.9 3.8 1.9 1.9 13.0 13.0 . 3 - 5 years actual desired 30.8 59.0 13.5 32.7 16.7 45.3 15.2 69.6 6 - 1 0 years actual desired 23.1 15.4 32.7 48.1 18.5 41.5 30.4 17.4 11 years or more actual desired 20.5 7.7 50.0 13.5 63.0 11.3 39.1 0.0 Missing data: actual work experience 0 (0.0%); desired work experience 1 (0.5%) For lesser amounts of work experience ("none" to "less than 1 year"), small proportions of a l l faculty groups (ranging from 0.0 to 5.1 percent) indicated having and considering these amounts as most desirable. Level of c e r t i f i c a t i o n . To s i g n i f y t h e i r "actual" technological or professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n the faculty groups were asked to designate the "highest" l e v e l of technological or professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n they had attained. For the l e v e l of c e r t i f i c a t i o n perceived as "desirable" they were asked to indicate the "minimal" l e v e l of professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n they thought desirable for faculty. The summarized data of the responses to these questions appear i n Table 35. 79. Generally, there was agreement between the various actual and desirable levels of professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n indicated by the faculty groups (see Table 35). TABLE 35 ACTUAL AND DESIRED LEVELS OF TECHNOLOGICAL OR PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATION FOR FACULTY C e r t i f i c a t i o n Core n(act)= =36 Business n(act)=50 Engineering n(act)=54 Health n(act)= =46 n(des)= =39 n(des)=50 n(des)=54 n(des) = 46 Basic professional actual 22.2 50.0 63.0 47.8 or tech. cert. desired 17.9 46.0 72.2 45.7 Basic trade actual 2.8 0.0 1.9 0.0 c e r t i f i c a t i o n desired 0.0 2.0 1.9 0.0 Advanced trade actual 2.8 0.0 7.4 0.0 c e r t i f i c a t i o n desired 5.1 2.0 1.9 4.3 Advanced prof.. :actual 2.8 6.0 20.4 23.9 or tech. cert. desired 2.6 4.0 11.1 21.7 Degree actual 30.6 16.0 3.7 28.3 desired 38.5 12.0 1.9 23.9 Other actual 8.3 0.0 1.9 0.0 desired 5.1 2.0 3.7 4.3 Not applicable actual desired 30.6 30.8 28.0 32.0 1.9 7.4 0.0 0.0 Missing data: actual c e r t i f i c a t i o n 5 (2.6%); desired c e r t i f i c a t i o n 2 (1.0%) "Basic professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n " was both possessed and considered desirable by the largest proportions of a l l faculty groups, except core. A l l groups had small differences between thei r actual and desired percentages for th i s l e v e l . Roughly one-half of business and health f a c u l t i e s had t h i s credential and s l i g h t l y fewer of both groups considered i t desirable. Sixty-three percent of engineering faculty had th i s l e v e l while 72.2 percent thought i t desirable. In contrast to the other groups, pro-80. portionately fewer of core faculty C22.2 percent) indicated having basic professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n while 17.9 percent, deemed i t desirable. "Advanced professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n " was held by almost twice as many members of engineering faculty (20.4 percent) than considered i t desirable (11.1 percent). Health faculty had similar actual and desired proportions (both less than 24 percent) for th i s l e v e l . There was l i t t l e d i s p a r i t y within each group indicating a "degree" as the i r actual and desirable levels of c e r t i f i c a t i o n . Core group had the largest i n t e r n a l difference between actual and desired percentages (30.6 and 38.5 percent respectively). Smaller differences i n actual and desired percentages existed for the health (28.3 and 23.9) and the business (16.0 and 12.0) f a c u l t i e s . Nearly one-third of core and business f a c u l t i e s checked the "not applicable" option for both the actual and desired levels (core faculty: 30.6 and 30.8 percent; business faculty: 28.0 and 32.0 percent respectively). A l l faculty groups had small (less than 8 percent) and similar actual and desired percentages for the basic and advanced levels of trade c e r t i f i -cation. Consulting or part-time work. As shown i n Table 36, the largest per-centages of a l l faculty groups indicated i t desirable to spend from 1 to-20 percent of the time worked per week i n consulting or part-time work. These percentages were higher than the percentages of faculty actually spending that amount of time i n such a c t i v i t i e s . Health faculty had the largest difference between actual and desired percentages of a l l groups (6.8 and 77.3)—while business had the smallest difference (61.5 and 82.7). 81. TABLE 36 ACTUAL AND DESIRABLE PERCENTAGE OF TIME WORKED PER WEEK SPENT IN CONSULTING OR PART-TIME WORK Percentage of time Core n(act)=38 n(des)=38 Business n(act)=52 n(des)=52 Engineering n(act)=54 n(des)=54 Health ' n/act)=44 n (des)=44 None actual 68.4 32.7 46.3 93.2 desired 5.3 1.9 11.1 18.2 1 to 20 actual 31.6 61.5 53.7 6.8 desired 86.8 82.7 88.9 77.3 21 to 40 actual 0.0 ' 5.'8 0.0 0.0 desired 7.9 13.5 0.0 4.5 41 to 60 actual 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 desired 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 61 to 80 actual desired 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 81 to 100 actual desired 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Missing data: actual 3 (1.6%); desired 3 (1 .6%) Relatively small percentages (ranging from 1.9 for business to 18.2 for health) indicated i t i desirable to spend "no time" worked per week i n consul-ting or part-time work. Summary. There were larger proportions of a l l faculty groups that desired 3 to 5 years of related work experience than the proportions that actually had that amount. Both business and engineering f a c u l t i e s had smaller percentages with 6 to 10 years experience than indicated i t as most desirable. For core and health f a c u l t i e s the differences were reversed. A l l groups had higher proportions that possessed 11 years or more of expe-r rience than perceived t h i s amount of experience as desirable. For less than 3 years of experience, the groups had generally small and similar figures for the actual and desired percentages. 82. Overall, there was agreement between the actual and desirable proportions of faculty groups for the various levels of professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n . The "basic" l e v e l of "professional or technological c e r t i f i -cation" was seen as desirable and possessed by the largest proportions of a l l groups, except core. (The largest percentages of core had, and thought, a degree was desirable.) In contrast to the basic l e v e l , smaller percentages of a l l faculty groups had, and perceived desirable, the "advanced profes-sional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n " — t h e largest of these actual and desirable percentages were for engineering and health. There was r e l a t i v e agreement between actual and desirable proportions for a "degree"—the largest percentages as well as the largest difference i n percentages was for the.core group (30.6, actual versus 38.5, idesired). Basic and advanced trade c e r t i f i c a t i o n was possessed and desired by a very small percentage of a l l groups (ranging from 0.0 to 7.4 percent). A l l four groups spent less time doing consulting work than they consid-ered desirable. The majorities f e l t that from 1 to 20 percent of the time worked per week should be spent i n consulting or part-time work. Academic Identity For academic ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s , faculty were instructed to: indicate both (1) thei r "highest" educational attainment and (2) what they considered the "minimal" desirable educational attainment for faculty. In addition, they were to s i g n i f y both (1) thei r frequency of engaging i n research a c t i v i t i e s as well as (2) what they perceived to be the value of these a c t i v i t e s . Tables 37 and 38 contain the summary data. 83. Educational attainment. Although, a bachelor . degree was the most common desired educational attainment f o r a l l groups (percentages ranged from 40.4 to 84.6), a l l except health had proportionately fewer with the d e g r e e — f o r health, the reverse occurred (see Table 37). Approximately twice as many members of the core (30.8 percent) and business (40.4 percent) f a c u l t i e s , and f i v e times as many engineering (27.8 percent) f a c u l t y had one master degree as thought desirable. (Health f a c u l t y had none and approximately 2 percent deeming i t desirable.) ' For educational attainment of l e s s than ai(bachelor degree, proportion-at e l y fewer of health (10.9 percent) and engineering (18.5 percent) f a c u l t i e s had a 2 or 3 year post-secondary diploma than deemed i t desirable (22.2 and 29.6 percent r e s p e c t i v e l y ) . Less than 10 percent of business had such preparation and a s l i g h t l y smaller percentage thought i t desi r a b l e . (None of core f a c u l t y had t h i s l e v e l , nor considered i t desirable.) Research a c t i v i t i e s . The smallest proportions of a l l groups (ranging from 15.2 percent of health.to 25.6 percent of core) "very often" or "frequently" engaged i n research a c t i v i t i e s (see Table 38). In contrast, the majority of a l l groups (percentages ranged from 68.5 f o r engineering to 80.8 for business) considered such a c t i v i t i e s as "very valuable" or "valuable." Summary. The largest proportions of a l l f a c u l t y groups considered one bachelor degree as the minimal desirable educational attainment. Fewer members of each group a c t u a l l y had t h i s c r e d e n t i a l — e x c e p t f o r health which had a s l i g h t l y higher percentage which possessed a bachelor . degree. Core, business, and engineering f a c u l t i e s had proportionately more with one master degree than considered i t desirable. None of the health group had t h i s 84. TABLE 37 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT: HIGHEST POSSESSED AND MINIMAL DESIRABLE ATTAINMENT „, . , Core Business Engineering Health Educational , x _„ . , _„ ° N r., , x ., K t t s . i n m ( x n t & n(act)=39 n(act)=52 n(act)=54 n(act)=46 n(des)=39 n(des)=52 n(des)=54 n(des)=45 Less than actual 0.0 1.9 1.9 2.2 Grade XII desired 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Secondary school actual 0.0 7.7 1.9 2.2 diploma desired 0.0 15.4 1.9 6.7 1 year post- actual 0.0 1.9 1.9 0.0 secondary diploma desired 0.0 0.0 5.6 2.2 Some university or actual 2.6 7.7 3.7 19.6 college desired 2.6 13.5 11.1 11.1 2 or 3 years post- actual 0.0 9.6 18.5 10.9 secondary diploma desired 0.0 7.7 29.6 22.2 One Bachelor actual 46.2 19.2 33.3 58.7 degree desired 84.6 40.4 44.4 53.3 One Master actual 30.8 40.4 27.8 0.0 degree desired 12.8 23.1 5.6 2.2 One Doctoral actual 7.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 degree desired 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Other actual 0.0 0.0 3.7 2.2 desired 0.0 0.0 1.9 2.2 Missing data: Actual educational attainment 0 (0.0%); desired educational attainment 1 (0.5%) a"Two or More . Master.; degrees" and "Two or More Doctoral degrees" were not provided as options for perceived desirable educational attainment, and thus have been deleted from analyses. TABLE 38 FREQUENCY AND VALUE OF RESEARCH ACTIVITIES FOR FACULTY Frequency and value Core n(act)=39 n(des)=39 Business n(act)=52 n(des)=52 Engineering n(act)=52 n(des)=54 Health n(act)=46 n(des)=45 Very often 7.7 5.8 1.9 0.0 Very valuable 30.8 32.7 22.2 33.3 Frequently 17.9 13.5 13.5 15.2 Valuable 48.7 48.1 46.3 40.0 Occasionally 23.1 28.8 23.1 23.9 Some value 15.4 17.3 24.1 22.2 Infrequently 28.2 23.1 28.8 17.4 L i t t l e value 0.0 1.9 5.6 4.4 Never 23.1 28.8 32.7 43.5 No value 5.1 0.0 1.9 0.0 Missing data: frequency 2 (1.0%); value 1 (0 .5%) credential and a small percentage considered i t desirable. Proportionately more of engineering and health f a c u l t i e s desired a "2 or 3 year post-secondary diploma" than actually possessed i t . Although the majority of each group considered research a c t i v i t i e s as "very valuable" or "valuable", the smallest proportions of a l l groups reported they "very often" or "frequently" engaged i n such a c t i v i t i e s . Teacher Identity Extent of teaching experience and l e v e l of education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n were examined by determining the proportions of each faculty group having those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , and the percentages indicating them as desirable. The data are contained i n Tables 39 and 40. 8 6 . Teaching experience. Of the various amounts of prior... teaching experi-ence shown i n Table 39, the largest proportions of a l l groups indicated 1 to 2 years as desirable for faculty. Approximate;.percentages were: engineering, 41; business, 43; core, 53; and health, 61. In examining the actual amounts of experience, i t was noted that approximately 23 percent of core, 37 percent of health, 40 percent of business, and 48 percent of engineering had no pr i o r teaching experience. Proportionately fewer of a l l groups thought t h i s "lack" of prior experience was d e s i r a b l e — w i t h health faculty having the largest difference i n percentages (no previous experience, 37.0; none desirable, 19.4). TABLE 39 ACTUAL AND DESIRABLE PRIOR TEACHING EXPERIENCE FOR FACULTY Core Business Engineering Health n(act)=39 n(act)=52 n(act)=54 n(act)=46 n(des)=34 n(des)=42 n(des)=42 n(des)=36 None actual 23.1 40.4 48.1 37.0 desired 20.6 33.3 38.1 19.4 Less than actual 12.8 28.8 9.3 13.0 1 year desired 0.0 16.7 2.4 2.8 1 to 2 years actual 25.6 13.5 18.5 6.5 desired 52.9 42.9 40.5 61.1 3 to 5 years actual 23.1 13.5 18.5 21.7 desired 20.6 7.1 19.0 11.1 6 to 10 years actual desired 7.7. 2.9 11.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.0 5.6 11 years actual 7.7 1.9 5.6 8.7 or more desired 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 Missing data: Actual teaching experience 0 (0.0%); desired teaching experi-ence 37 (19.4%) Extent of Experience Education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n . The four groups indicated both . the "highest" l e v e l they possessed as w e l l as the "lowest" l e v e l of education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n they thought desirable for faculty. As shown i n Table 40, the largest proportions of a l l groups had no c e r t i f i c a t i o n nor saw any l e v e l as desirable. The largest difference i n actual and desired percentages was for health (had "none", 50.0; none "desirable", 31.1) while the smallest difference was for core (had "none", 65.8; none "desirable", 63.9). TABLE 40 EDUCATION OR TEACHING CERTIFICATION: HIGHEST POSSESSED AND MINIMAL DESIRABLE LEVEL Core Business Engineering Health C e r t i f i c a t i o n n(act)=38 n(act)=51 n(act)=51 n(act)=44 n(des)=36 n(des)=51 n(des)=53 n(des)=45 None actual 65. 8 desired 63. 9 Teaching Licence actual desired 2. 0. 6 0 Instructor's actual 0. 0 Diploma desired 11- 1 Standard actual 2. 6 C e r t i f i c a t e desired 5. 6 Prof. C e r t i f i c a t e and/or Bach of Ed. Degree actual desired 18. 8. 4 3 Master Degree of actual 5. 3 Education desired 0. 0 Doctoral Degree actual 0. 0 of Education desired 0. 0 Other actual desired 5. 11. 3 1 80.4 78.4 50.0 70.6 66.0 31.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 4.4 7.8 3.9 9.1 19.6 24.5 20.0 0.0 3.9 2.3 0.0 0.0 4.4 5.9 3.9 34.1 2.0 5.7 26.7 2.0 3.9 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.9 5.9 4.5 3.9 3.8 13.3 Missing data: Actual education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n 7 (3.7%); desired education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n 6 (3.1%) Of the various c e r t i f i c a t i o n levels possessed by facult y , a Professional C e r t i f i c a t e and/or Bachelor of Education Degree was possessed by the most faculty- More of health (34.1 percent) and core (18.4 percent) had these credentials than indicated them as the lowest desirable l e v e l (health, 26.7 percent; and core, 8.3 percent). Proportionately fewer of a l l groups had an Instructor's Diploma than considered i t as desirable (desirable percentages ranged from 11.1 for core to 24.5 for engineering). Generally very small percentages of the faculty groups possessed a Master Degree of Education. With one small exception (business, 2 percent), none of the groups considered i t desirable. None had a Doctoral Degree of Education nor considered i t the lowest desirable l e v e l of c e r t i f i c a t i o n . Summary. The most common amount of pr i o r teaching experience perceived as desirable for faculty by a l l groups was 1 to 2 years (percentages ranged from 40.5 for engineering to 61.1 for health). Generally though, the largest proportions of the faculty groups had no prior teaching experience. The majority of a l l groups had no education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n or licencing. S i m i l a r l y , the largest proportions of a l l groups did not think any l e v e l was needed. Of the various c e r t i f i c a t i o n l e v e l s , the most common credential possessed was a Professional C e r t i f i c a t e and/or a Bachelor of Education Degree with proportionately more of core and health having them than deeming them as desirable. An Instructor's Diploma (the second most common c e r t i f i c a t i o n held) had proportionately fewer of a l l groups with the c e r t i f i c a t i o n than thought i t desirable. A Master Degree of Education and Doctoral Degree of Education had zero or very small percentages for the actual and desired proportions. 89. Composite of the Three Identity Dimensions Faculty respondents were asked to allocate percentages of time they "actually" spent and f e l t "should" spend i n teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s , academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s , and professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s over the "ten month duty year." These data, given as mean per-centages i n Table 41, present a composite of the a c t i v i t i e s i n the three i d e n t i t y dimensions. A l l faculty groups had higher mean percentages for time actually spent i n teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s than they f e l t was desirable to spend i n such a c t i v i t i e s (see Table 41). The largest differences between actual and desired mean percentages were for both core (79.23 versus 68.75), and health (84.64 versus 73.82) f a c u l t i e s — t h e smallest was for engineering (76.52 versus 70.91). TABLE 41 MEAN PERCENTAGES OF ACTUAL AND DESIRED TIME WORKED IN TEACHING, ACADEMIC, AND PROFESSIONAL/TECHNOLOGIST ACTIVITIES A c t i v i t y Core n(act)=39 n(des)=36 Business n(act)=50 n(des)=51 Engineering n(act)=54 n(des)=54 Health n(act)=42 n(des)=45 Teaching and actual 79; .23 75. .46 76, .52 84. .64 related desired 68. .75 66, .96 70, .91 73. .82 a c t i v i t i e s difference - 10. .48 8. .50 5, .61 10, .82 Academic and actual 12. .26 10. .46 9, • 35 7, .14 scholarly desired 14. .86 13. .18 12. .24 13, .38 a c t i v i t i e s difference - 2, .60 - 2. .72 - 2. .89 - 6. .24 Professional actual 8. or techno- .51 14. .08 14. .13 8. .21 l o g i s t desired 16. .39 19. .86 16. .85 12. .80 a c t i v i t i e s difference - 7. .88 - 5. .78 - 2. .72 - 4. .59 Missing data: Actual percentage of time spent 6 (3.1%); desirable percentage of time 5 (2.6%) 90. Correspondingly, the opposite results occurred with, the other two ide n t i t y dimensions. A l l groups had lower mean percentages for actual time spent i n both academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s , and professional or tech-nologist a c t i v i t i e s , than they f e l t they should spend. There were small differences (less than 3.00) with the exception of health faculty (approx-imately 6.00). Variation between actual and desirable proportions for the groups existed for professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s — d i f f e r e n c e s ranged from less than 8.00 for core, to less than 3.00 for engineering. Summary. The four groups spent more time i n teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s than they f e l t was desirable. Less time than thought desirable, was spent i n academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s and professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s by a l l faculty groups. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary The purpose of th i s study was to determine the characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s of four faculty groups—core, business, engineering,. and health-teaching i n f u l l - t i m e , two and three year programs i n an i n s t i t u t e of technology. Three perspectives were examined: 1. Faculty's actual professional/technologist, academic, and teacher characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s ; 2. Faculty's and administrators' perceptions : of desirable professional/technologist, academic, and teacher characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s for faculty; and 3. Wherever applicable, the congruence between the actual and desirable characteristics for f a c u l t y , as perceived by faculty. Three hypotheses were•delineated: 1. There are no differences i n the actual i d e n t i t y dimensions of professional/tech-nologist, academic, and teacher among the four faculty groups considered. 92. 2. There are no differences i n the desired state of the a c t i v i t y dimensions as perceived by the faculty groups and administrators. 3. There are no differences between the actual and desired states of the id e n t i t y dimensions within each faculty group as perceived by faculty. The l i t e r a t u r e on technological faculty indicated that professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n , related work experience, and academic degrees i n the tech-nology taught were important for faculty teaching i n technological programs. Further, a teaching credential, previous teaching experience, and instruction i n teaching methods were considered desirable for technological faculty. To obtain the data two questionnaires were administered: one to a l l of the 289 faculty (comprised of core, business, engineering, and health groups); and the other to a l l of the 36 administrators at the I n s t i t u t e . The data were described i n the form of percentages and where possible, i n f e r e n t i a l s t a t i s t i c s , using one way analysis of variance, were examined. Limitations The study was subject to certain l i m i t a t i o n s . F i r s t , the investigation was concerned only with faculty teaching i n f u l l - t i m e , two and three year programs i n one technological i n s t i t u t e . A l l members were sent questionnaires. However, despite follow-up procedures 28.9 percent of the potential respon-dents f a i l e d to return the questionnaire. Thus, there may be bias of an undetermined nature present i n the r e s u l t s . F i n a l l y , since the question-9 3 . naires were self-administered, the study i s subject to the usual l i m i t a t i o n s of self-reported data. Conclusions, Summary of Differences, and Implications The hypothesis that there are no differences i n the actual i d e n t i t y dimensions of professional/technologist, academic, and teacher among the four faculty groups was rejected. This conclusion i s based on the following differences: 1. Core faculty differed from the business, engineering, and health groups i n the following c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : a) Their most frequent length of previous work experience r e l a t i n g to the courses or technology taught was 3 to 5 years rather than 11 years or more as for the other three groups. b) Their most common l e v e l of profes-sional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n • was a "degree" rather than "basic professional or technological c e r t i f i -cation" as for the other three groups. c) A smaller proportion of core faculty had no previous teaching experience i n comparison to the other three groups. Core and health f a c u l t i e s differed from the business and engineering groups i n that: a) The minority of the former engaged i n consulting or "part-time" work while the majority of the other two groups engaged i n such a c t i v i t i e s . b) Proportionately more of the core and health f a c u l t i e s had a Professional C e r t i f i c a t e and/or Bachelor of Education Degree as the i r highest l e v e l of edu-cation or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n . c) Smaller proportions of the core and health groups had taken a short inservice teaching preparation course. d) Core and health f a c u l t i e s spent s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p <.05) less time (on the average) i n professional and technologist a c t i v i t i e s during the "10 month year" than did the business and engineering groups. Health faculty spent s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p <.05) more time i n teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s than did the business and engineering f a c u l t i e s Business faculty's most common highest edu-cational attainment was a master , degree rather than a bachelor degree as was the case for the engineering, and health groups. The implication from these data i s that the I n s t i t u t e faculty should not be thought of as having i d e n t i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Rather, they should be perceived as a heterogeneous faculty having both common and different characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s . The hypothesis that there are no differences i n the desired state of the i d e n t i t y dimensions as perceived by the faculty groups and the administrators was rejected. This conclusion i s based on the following differences for the "desirable" characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s for faculty among the groups: 1. The administrators group differed from the core, business, engineering, and health groups i n that: a) The greater proportion of the administrators did not consider that previous teaching experience was "desirable" for faculty; whereas, the greater proportions of the four faculty groups perceived 1 to 2 years of experi-ence as desirable. b) The administrators, of a l l the groups, had the greatest amount of time allocated to teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s . 2. The largest proportions of the administrators and the business faculty thought 6 to 10 years of previous experience related to the technology or courses taught was desirable for faculty versus 3 to 5 years for the other three groups. Health faculty differed from core, business, engineering, and administrators groups i n that: a) They considered credit courses i n :.. i n s t r u c t i o n or education taken from a college or university, as well as a l l the in s t r u c t i o n and education topics taken i n such courses, as more "useful" than the other groups. There were s i g n i f i c a n t differences (p <.05) between health faculty and the various groups for a l l , except one of the topics. b) A considerably smaller proportion of health faculty thought that no education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n or licencing was needed for faculty. c) Health faculty had the largest pro-portion that f e l t a Professional C e r t i f i -cate and/or Bachelor of .Education Degree was the lowest l e v e l of education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n that was desirable for faculty. The largest proportion of the core faculty regarded a "degree" as the minimal desirable l e v e l of professional or technological c e r t i f i -cation i n contrast to "basic professional or 97. technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n " as specified by the business, engineering, health, and administrators groups. 5. Core faculty differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p <.05) from the engineering and administrators groups i n that core faculty thought an educational leave of absence was more "useful." 6. Business faculty differed s i g n i f i c a n t l y (p <.05) from health faculty i n that business faculty considered consulting or "part-time" work as more "useful." These differences suggest that the four faculty groups and the administrators should not be thought of as i d e n t i c a l i n what they perceive as "desirable" characteristics and a c t i v i t i e s for faculty to have. The differences that were found to exist could lead to disagreement about what are "useful" and "valuable" characteristics for faculty to have and what a c t i v i t i e s they should undertake. Further, i t i s suggested that the opinions of the various faculty groups be ascertained on the Usefulness and value of new upgrading and development programs for faculty before they are implemented. This i s based on the assumption that faculty groups are unlikely to f u l l y participate i n such programs unless they consider them to be useful or valuable. The hypothesis that there are no differences between the actual and desired states of the id e n t i t y dimensions within each faculty group, as perceived by faculty, was rejected. The evidence for t h i s conclusion and the implications derived from some of the evidence are: 98. 1. Professional or Technologist Identity Generally, the faculty groups considered 3 to 5 years of previous work experience related to the technology or courses taught was most desirable; however, fewer members of each group actually had t h i s amount. For 6 to 10 years of experience there were proportionately more of business and engineering f a c u l t i e s desiring, than were found to possess, t h i s amount. The performance of consulting or "part-time" work from one to 20 per-cent of the time worked per week was considered desirable by the majority of the four faculty groups. However, fewer members of each group actually engaged i n such a c t i v i t i e s . This finding implies that the four faculty groups may be receptive to undertaking further consulting a c t i v i t i e s . 2. Academic Identity A bachelor degree was the modal minimal desirable educational attainment specified by a l l faculty groups; however, with the exception of health f a c u l t y , fewer members of a l l groups possessed t h i s l e v e l of education as th e i r highest educational attainment. Fewer members of the engineering and health f a c u l t i e s actually possessed a "2 or 3 year post-secondary diploma" than considered t h i s l e v e l as desirable. A master degree was possessed by more of the core, business, and engineering f a c u l t i e s than considered i t desirable. Thus, i t would appear that members of the faculty groups having less than a bachelor; degree would generally be receptive to undertaking educational leaves of absence or part-time study to upgrade thei r educational credentials to a bachelor., degree l e v e l . This would not appear to apply to university, post-graduate study (a master, degree and beyond). 99. Although the minority of a l l groups "very often" or "frequently" engaged i n research a c t i v i t i e s , the majority of the faculty groups considered such a c t i v i t i e s as "very valuable" or "valuable;." This finding implies that a l l faculty groups would be receptive to the opportunity to take part i n more research a c t i v i t i e s . 3. Teacher Identity From 1 to 2 years of prior teaching experience was seen as "desirabe" by the highest proportions of a l l faculty groups; however, generally smaller proportions of a l l groups actually had t h i s amount. Generally the largest proportions of the faculty groups had no prior experience, while fewer members of each group saw t h i s "lack" of experience as desirable. Consequently, i t would seem that faculty would be receptive to receiving assistance i n in s t r u c t i o n . This speculation i s supported by the finding that the majority of a l l groups had taken a short inservice teaching preparation course (see Table 16). 4. Composite of the Identity Dimensions A l l faculty groups actually spent more time performing teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s during the i r duty year than they f e l t they "should" spend. Correspondingly, a l l groups actually spent less time than they considered desirable i n academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s and professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s . These findings imply that a l l faculty groups would be receptive to reapportioning the i r time spent to increase the percentage of time spent i n academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s and profes-sional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s , and reduce the time spent i n teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s . 100. Recommendations for Research Based on the findings of t h i s study the following recommendations for further research are suggested: 1. I t would be useful to ascertain why the faculty groups indicated that 3 to 5 years of professional or technologist work experi-ence was desirable as fewer members of each group had that amount; 2. A study should be conducted to determine why the business faculty perceived consulting or part-time work as more "useful" than did the health faculty; 3. Research should be done to determine why the faculty groups and administrators perceived faculty engaging i n research a c t i v i t i e s as "valuable"; 4. A study should be done to determine why the health faculty perceived instruction or education topics as more "useful" than did the other faculty groups and administrators; 5. A study should be conducted to determine i f the length of time employed as a faculty member influences the characteristics perceived as desirable attributes for faculty; Research should be done to ascertain the actual c r i t e r i a for h i r i n g faculty i n an attempt to explain the differences found between the "actual" and "desired" Edu-cational attainment, previous teaching experience, and prior work experience; I t would be helpful to determine the r e l a t i o n -ship between what the faculty groups and the administrators perceive to be the purpose(s) of the In s t i t u t e and how these respective groups believe that faculty can best f u l f i l l the purpose(s) i n terms of the r e l a t i v e amounts of time faculty should spend i n teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s , academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s , and professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s ; and A follow-up study, to the present one should be done to determine i f there are changes i n the "actual" characteristics of technological faculty that would approximate the "desirable" c r i t e r i a i d e n t i f i e d i n the present study. 102. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Academic Board for Higher Education i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The role of  d i s t r i c t arid regional colleges i n the B r i t i s h Columbia system of  higher education. Author, January 1965. American Association of Junior Colleges. Preparing two-year college teachers for the '70's (Report of a Conference, Warrenton, V i r g i n i a , November 17-19, 1968). Washington, D.C: Author, 1969. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 034 516). Anden, T. Time to take perspective view of CAAT aims and service. Canadian University and College, March 1970, 30-31. Barlow, M.L., & Reinhart, B. P r o f i l e s of trade and technical teachers:  comprehensive report. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education, 1968. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 019 457). Brawer, F.B. Community college teacher preparation: past, present,  future. Paper presented at the American Association for Higher Education Conference, Chicago, March 13, 1973. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 071 661). Bremer, J. Report by the BCIT Advisory Council to the Commission on  Post-Secondary Education. Report submitted to the Commission on Post-Secondary Education of the Government of B r i t i s h Columbia, July 1973. B r i t i s h Columbia In s t i t u t e of Technology. BCIT and BCIT Staff Society  Collective Agreement, June 15, 1976-December 31, 1977. Burnaby: Author, 1976. (a) B r i t i s h Columbia Institute of Technology. BCIT calendar 1976-1977. Burnaby: Author, 1976. (b) Canadian Education Association. The CEA Handbook 1978 (LE KI-ES-KI). Toronto: Author, 1978. Career campus (1976-1977 annual report to the B r i t i s h Columbia In s t i t u t e of Technology Board of Governors). Burnaby: B r i t i s h Columbia Ins t i t u t e of Technology, 1977. Chant, S.N.F., Liersch, J.E., & Walrod, R.P. Report of the Royal Commission  on Education. V i c t o r i a : Queen's Pr i n t e r , 1960. Clark, Honorable R. (Minister of Education). Post-secondary education u n t i l 1972: an Alberta policy statement. Government document, January 1970. Cohen, A.M. Teacher preparation: rationale and practice. Junior College  Journal, May 1967, 37(8), 21-25. 103. Cohen, A.M. Toward a professional faculty. In A.M. Cohen (Ed.), New directions for community colleges (Vol. 1). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1973, 101-117. Day, W.C. Professional preparation and experience of instructors i n community junior colleges and technical i n s t i t u t i o n s . 1974. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 097 923). Dennison, J.D., Tunner, A., Jones, G., & Forrester, G.C. Survey of college faculty, tabulation of responses, spring 1973. The impact of community  colleges (Rep. 10). Vancouver: B r i t i s h Columbia Research, 1973. Dhalla, N.K. These Canadians. Toronto: McGraw-Hill, 1966. Douglas, T.W. Trends i n industry: how they relate to technological education. Elements of Technology, September 1974, 5_, 8-11. Garrison, R.H. Junior college faculty: issues and problems, a preliminary  national appraisal. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1967. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 012 177). G i l b e r t , M.L. A study of community college teacher-training programs i n selected u n i v e r s i t i e s . Mount Pleasant: Central Michigan University, 1971, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 104 491). Glass, G.V., & Stanley, J.C. S t a t i s t i c a l methods i n education and psychology. Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1970. Gleazer, E.J.Jr. AAJC approach. Junior College Journal, May 1969, 39(8), 7-9. Goode, W. Community within a community: the professions. American  Sociological Review, A p r i l 1957, _22, 194-200. Gordon, S.B., & Whitfield, R.P. A formula for teacher preparation. Junior College Journal, May 1967, 37(8), 26-28. Government of Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan Technical I n s t i t u t e Calendar  1978-79. Moose Jaw: Author, 1978. Graney, M.R. The technical i n s t i t u t e . New York: Centre for Applied Research i n Education, 1964. Greenaway, H. Assistant Academic Registrar, Polytechnic of North London, London. Personal communication, January 31, 1977. Greenwood, E. Attributes of a profession. Social Work, July 1957, 2_, 45-55. Harris, N.C. Technical education i n the junior college: new programs for new jobs. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Junior Colleges, 1964. 104. Harvey, E. Educational systems and the labour market. Ontario: Longman Canada, 1974. Helmstadter, G.C. Research concepts i n human behavior: education, psychology, sociology. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970. Kinloch, G.C. Sociological theory: i t s development and major paradigms. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1977. Kurth, E.L., & Gianini, P.C. Professional competence of teachers of technical education i n F l o r i d a . Tallahassee: F l o r i d a State Department of Education, 1967. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 017 687). Northern Alberta Institute of Technology. NAIT 1975-1976 Calendar. Edmonton: Author, 1975. O'Banion, T. Patterns of s t a f f development. In A.M. Cohen (Ed.), New directions for community colleges (Vol. 1). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1973, 9-30. Ostry, S. The occupational composition of the labour force (1961 Census Monograph, Dominion Bureau of S t a t i s t i c s ) . Ottawa: Queen's Pr i n t e r , 1967. Quick, D. The CAAT program and planning. Canadian University, June 1968, 15-16. Singer, D.S. Do we need a community college i n s t i t u t e ? Junior College  Journal, October 1968, 39(2), 36-40. Siscoe, N. Two comments on Ontario's Community College. Continuous  Learning, September-October 1966, _5, 222-226. Southern Alberta I n s t i t u t e of Technology. SAIT career campus 1976'77  calendar. Calgary: Author, 1976. S t a t i s t i c s Canada. Enrolment i n community colleges 1974-75. Ottawa: Author, December 1976. Systems Research Group. The Ontario Colleges of Applied Arts and Technology (A study prepared for the Commission on Post-Secondary Education i n Ontario). Ontario: Author, 1971. Thom, G.A. Technical i n s t i t u t e faculty. Unpublished major paper, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Higher Education, 1971. Watson, C., & Butorac, J. Qualified manpower i n Ontario: 1961-1986. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies i n Education, 1965. White, J.S. History of B r i t i s h Columbia In s t i t u t e of Technology. Unpublished manuscript, 1969. 105. Wroot, R.E. A study of the need for pedagogical trai n i n g as perceived by  the s t a f f of the Alberta Institutes of Technology. Edmonton: University of Alberta, 1970. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 049 377). REFERENCE NOTE 1. Henderson, N.M. The B r i t i s h Columbia I n s t i t u t e of Technology - a f i r s t  i n the province. Unpublished report by the Director of Vocational Curriculum of the Government of B r i t i s h Columbia, p. 2, date not known. 106. APPENDIX A LIST OF ITEMS AND SUPPORTING RATIONALE FOR IDENTITY DIMENSIONS Professional or Technologist Identity 1. C e r t i f i c a t i o n or Registration Necessary to Practice the Profession or Technology To practice the profession or technology, licencing and c e r t i f y i n g bodies require the candidate to pass examinations and other requirements. Therefore, a large aspect of having a professional or technologist i d e n t i t y i s having attained c e r t i f i c a t i o n . Basic and advanced levels of c e r t i f i c a t i o n are: Basic professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n Basic trade c e r t i f i c a t i o n Advanced trade c e r t i f i c a t i o n Advanced professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n 2. Professional or Technologist Community Identity Part of being a professional or technologist i s perceiving oneself as "belonging" to the community of professionals or technologists. Evidence of belonging to the community i s keeping i n contact with other practicing professionals or technologists. Ways of keeping i n contact are: Informal discussions or v i s i t s with other faculty or professionals Membership i n professional or technological associations Attend meetings of the association or society Serve on committees Regularly read professional or technological magazines or journals Engage i n consulting or part-time work 3. Work Experience i n the Profession or Technology Having work experience as a practicing professional or . technologist helps to consolidate or "cement" one's identity as a professional or technologist. Types of work experiences are: Technician or technologist Practicing professional Administrator or supervisor Consultant 4. Continuing Professional or Technologist Development A requirement of being a professional or technologist i s continuing one's development and education i n one's chosen career. Continuing development a c t i v i t i e s engaged i n on an ongoing basis are Attend conferences or workshops Regularly read professional or technological journals, magazines, or publications Take courses at university but not counting towards a program Take courses at colleges or other post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s but not counting towards a degree or credential Spend time i n industry, business, or health care organizations during non-teaching time Continuing development a c t i v i t i e s occasionally or infrequently under taken are: Professional development leave of absence to gain experience i n business, engineering, health, or academic organizations Educational leave of absence for study purposes Undertaking a diploma or degree program on a part-time basis Writing a technical or professional paper, manual, text, or book Academic Identity 1. Level of Educational Attainment The route to a t t a i n an academic i d e n t i t y i s to acquire know-ledge and a n a l y t i c a l thinking s k i l l s at i n s t i t u t i o n s of higher learning ( u n i v e r s i t i e s ) . Levels of educational attainment are: Less than Grade XII or equivalent Secondary school diploma One year post-secondary diploma Some university or college (but less than a degree) Two or three year post-secondary diploma Bachelor degree Master . degree Doctoral degree 2. Research Orientation The other major aspect of academic ide n t i t y i s engaging i n research a c t i v i t i e s . Research a c t i v i t i e s are: Pure research to seek new theoretical knowledge or under-standing Applied research to seek new and improved techniques, processes, methods, and/or tools which can be used or applied i n industry, business, or health care environments Teacher Identity 1. C e r t i f i c a t i o n , Licencing, and Educational Attainments A large aspect of the teacher i d e n t i t y i s having the formal entrance requirements to be a practicing teacher i n education i n s t i t u t i o n s . Formal entrance requirements consist of lic e n c i n g , c e r t i f i c a t i o n , and having education degrees. Levels of education degrees and/or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n are: Teaching Licence Instructors': Diploma Standard C e r t i f i c a t e Professional C e r t i f i c a t e and/or Bachelor of Education Degree Master . of Education Degree (M.A. or M.Ed.) Doctoral Degree of Education 2. Teaching Experience Having teaching experience strengthens one's ide n t i t y of being a teacher. Types of i n s t i t u t i o n s where teaching experience i s gained are: Elementary or junior secondary Senior secondary Vocational or trade Technological or technical College University 3. Education and/or Instruction Credit. Courses Having credit courses from a university or college i n inst r u c t i o n and/or education i s in t e g r a l to the teacher i d e n t i t y . Without them one can not obtain a Professional C e r t i f i c a t e . 109. The range of topics on in s t r u c t i o n and education are: Theories of learning applied to adults Instructional objectives Preparation and use of course outlines Construction and assessment of tests or examinations Teaching techniques Selection, development and use of audio-visual aids Diagnosis of learning and teaching problems Philosophy and objectives of post-secondary educational i n s t i t u t i o n s Characteristics of technological, vocational, and career students 4. Inservice Teaching Preparation Course Taking a short inservice teaching preparation course by those who lack teaching experience i s an introduction to instruction and comprises a small part of the teacher i d e n t i t y . 5. Supervised Teaching Internship In order to obtain a Professional C e r t i f i c a t e i n teaching, education students must be supervised i n teaching practicums held i n schools. Therefore, part of the teacher id e n t i t y i s having supervised teaching experiences. 110. APPENDIX B QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE FACULTY GROUPS PERSONAL DATA Please indicate your technology (or department) (1) Basic health sciences, chemistry, english, mathematics, or physics (2) Business (3) Engineering (4) Health Please indicate your age. (1) 20-30 years (2) 31-40 years (3) 41-50 years (4) 51-60 years (5) 61-65 years Please indicate your sex. (1) Male (2) Female SECTION I This section of the Questionnaire (Questions 4 to 15) i s concerned with professional, technological, i n s t r u c t i o n a l and academic a c t i v i t i e s . In t his section, please indicate what you have done or are doing i n these areas. TECHNOLOGICAL OR PROFESSIONAL QUESTIONS 4(a) This question concerns the work experience(s) you had before joining;the Institute. Please indicate the type(s) of professional or technological work experience(s) you had i n the d i s c i p l i n e or technology you are currently teaching. Please check a l l that apply. (1) technician or technologist (2) practicing professional (3) administrator or supervisor (4) consultant (5) not applicable—was a. student prior to j o i n i n g the I n s t i t u t e with no work experience (6) not applicable—other (please specify) 111. 4(b) How much work experience related to the courses or technology you teach did you have prior to joining the Institute? (1) none (2) less than 1 year (3) 1 to 2 years (4) 3 to 5 years (5) 6 to 10 years (6) 11 years or more 5. What i s the highest l e v e l of technological or professional c e r t i f i c a t i o n you have attained? (1) Basic professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n or diploma (e.g. R.N.,. R..T.., C.G.A., R.I.A., P.Eng.) (2) Basic trade c e r t i f i c a t i o n (Journeyman standing) (3) Advanced trade c e r t i f i c a t i o n or diploma (Trade extension) (4) Advanced professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n (e.g., A.R.T., C.A., F.S.R., (5) Other (please specify) (6) Not applicable 6(a) Listed below (Items A to E) are a c t i v i t i e s faculty may have done to upgrade or broaden their technological or professional a b i l i t i e s . Since joining t'he I n s t i t u t e , have you: (A) Attended professional or technological conferences or workshops? (1) Yes (2) No If "Yes", approximately how often? (1) 1 or more a year (2) 1 every 2 years (3) 1 every 3 or more years (B) Read professional or.:technological journals, magazines or publications? (1) Yes (2) No If "Yes", to what extent? (.1) each issue of publication (2) most issues (3) some issues (C) Taken courses at university, but not had them count toward a degree or credential? (1) Yes (2) No If "Yes", to what extent? (1) 1 or more a year (2) 1 every 2 years (3) 1 every 3 or more years (D) Taken courses at colleges or other post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s but not counting'toward a degree or credential? (1) Yes (2) No If "Yes", to what extent? (1) 1 or more a year . (2) 1 every 2 years (3) 1 every 3 or more years (E) Spent short amounts of time ( i . e . one to s i x weeks) i n industry, business or health care organizations during breaks, holidays or one month unspecified duties? (1) Yes (2) No If "Yes", approximately how often? (1) every year (2) every two years (3) every three or more years (F) Undertaken any other short term, ad hoc professional or techno-l o g i c a l upgrading or broadening a c t i v i t i e s ? (1) Yes (2) No If "Yes", please specify what they were i n the spaces provided. CD ( D ' 6(b) Listed below are a c t i v i t i e s which generally require more time for faculty to upgrade or.broaden their professional or technological knowledge or expertise. Please check a l l of the following a c t i v i t i e s you have engaged i n since joining the Ins t i t u t e . (1) professional development leave of absence to gain experience i n business, engineering, health, or academic organizations (2) educational leave of absence for study purposes (including independent study) (3) enrolled i n diploma or degree program on a part-time basis • (4) writing a technical or professional paper (5) writing a manual, text or book 113. 6(b) Continued .. .. (6) other (please specify) (1) ; (2) (7) have not engaged i n any a c t i v i t i e s (8) not applicable 7(a) Faculty may keep i n contact with their profession or technology i n other ways. Please check a l l the ways you usually keep i n contact with your technology or profession. (1) informal discussions or v i s i t s with other faculty, professionals or technologists (2) membership i n professional or technological associations (3) attend meetings of the association or society ... (4) attend conferences or workshops (5) serve on professional or technological committees outside of the I n s t i t u t e .... . . ' (6) regularly read professional or technological magazines or journals (7) other (please specify) (1) (2) (8) not applicable 7(b) Consulting or part-time work i s another way faculty can keep i n contact with their profession or technology. Do you engage i n consulting or part-time work? (1) Yes (2) No If "Yes", approximately what percentage of the time you work per week, do you spend i n consulting or part-time work? (1) 1 to 20% (2) 21 to 40% (3) 41 to 60% (4) 61 to 80% (5) 81 to 100% ACADEMIC QUESTIONS 8. What is::the highest educational attainment you have? (1 (2 (3 (4 (5 (6 (7 (8 (9 (10 (11 (12 Less than Grade XII or equivalent Secondary school diploma One year post-secondary diploma Some university or college (but less than a degree) Two or three year post-secondary diploma One Bachelor degree Two or more Bachelor degrees . One Master degree Two or more Master degrees One Doctoral degree Two or more Doctoral degrees Other (please specify) 9. Since jo i n i n g the Institute have you engaged i n (during non-teaching time) research a c t i v i t i e s leading to new or improved processes, tools, techniques, methods or knowledge? Very Often Frequently Occasionally Infrequently Never 1 2 3 4 5 TEACHING QUESTIONS 10(a) How many years of teaching experience did you have before jo i n i n g the Institute? (1) No teaching experience .... (2) Less than 1 year (3) 1 to 2 years _ (4) 3 to 5 years (5) 6 to 10 years (6) 11 years or more (b) At what level(s) did you teach? Please check a l l that apply. (1) elementary or junior secondary (2) senior secondary (3) vocational or trade (4) technological or technical ... (5) college (6) university (7) not applicable 11. Have you taken any of the following topics i n credit courses i n inst r u c t i o n or education ( i . e . methodology of instruction) from a university or college? Please check a l l the topics/courses taken. (1) theories of learning applied to adults (2) i n s t r u c t i o n a l objectives (3) preparation and use of course outlines (4) construction and assessment of tests or examinations (5) teaching techniques (lectures, discussions, seminars, f i e l d t r i p s , lab sessions, projects) 115. Continued .. (6) selection, development and use of audio-v i s u a l aids (7) diagnosis of learning and teaching problems .... (8) philosophy and objectives of post-secondary educational i n s t i t u t i o n s (9) characteristics of technological, vocational and career students (10) other (please specify) (1) :  (2) (3) _ (11) none taken Have you taken a short ( i . e . one to four weeks) inservice teaching preparation course? ( i . e . a course offered to gain knowledge and give instruction under supervision). (1) Yes (2) No In your teaching experience(s) have you received assistance i n instruction and teaching preparation from an experienced faculty member or teacher during your f i r s t year of teaching? (1) Yes (2) No (3) Undecided , Please check the highest l e v e l of education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n or licencing you have. (1) Teaching Licence (2) Instructors'; Diploma (3) Standard C e r t i f i c a t e (in teaching) (4) Professional C e r t i f i c a t e and/or Bachelor of Education Degree (5) Master Degree of Education (M.A. or M.Ed.) (6) Doctoral Degree of Education (7) None (8) Other (please specify) GENERAL QUESTION For the t o t a l amount of the time you work during the ten month year (that includes the nine calendar months i n the academic year and the one month free of teaching and student evaluation duties), approximately what percentage of time do you spend i n each of the following three kinds of a c t i v i t i e s ? For parts A, B and C please write the percentages i n the spaces provided. 15 . Continued (A) teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s , (e.g. preparing for and giving classes, marking, counselling students, etc.) (B) academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s , (e.g. increasing your, academic or educational q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , doing research.) (C). professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s . (e.g. keeping i n contact with your profession or technology, broadening your professional or technological expertise, doing consulting or part-time work.) % TOTAL = 100 % SECTION I I The remainder of the questionnaire (Questions 16 to 28) i s concerned with professional, technological, i n s t r u c t i o n a l and academic a c t i v i t i e s that you think would be- valuable, desirable -or important for faculty to have. A l l the questions concern f u l l time, regular, day school, teaching faculty. (Counsellors, support s t a f f , technical s t a f f , l i b r a r i a n s , industry services, health continuing education, and career program faculty are excluded and not referred to;) TECHNOLOGICAL OR PROFESSIONAL QUESTIONS 16(a) Listed below are types of professional or technological work experiences faculty may have prior to joining.the I n s t i t u t e . For each item, please c i r c l e the number which best indicates your opinion of i t s value and importance. Very Some No Useful Use Use A. 1 2 3 4 5 B. practicing professional 1 2 3 4 5 C. administrator or supervisor 1 2 3 4 5 D. 1 2 3 4 5 E. other (please specify and indicate importance) 1 2 3 4 5 117. 16(b) How much work experience related to the technology or courses you teach do you f e e l i s most desirable for newly hired faculty? (1) none needed (2) less than 1 year (3) 1 to 2 years (4) 3 to 5 years (5) 6 to 10 years (6) 11 years or more 17. For your technology what do you think i s the minimal l e v e l of professional or t e c h n o l o g i c a l ' c e r t i f i c a t i o n desirable for faculty? (1) Basic professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n or diploma (e.g. R.N., R.T., C.G.A., R.I.A., P.Eng.) (2) Basic trade c e r t i f i c a t i o n (Journeyman standing) (3) Advanced trade c e r t i f i c a t i o n or diploma (Trade extension) (4) Advanced professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n (e.g. A.R.T., C.A., F.S.R., L.C.S.L.T.) (5) Other (please specify) (6) Not applicable 18(a) Listed below are a c t i v i t i e s faculty may engage i n to upgrade or broaden their technological or professional a b i l i t i e s . For each item, please c i r c l e the number which best indicates your opinion of i t s value and importance. Very Some No Useful Use Use A. attend conferences or workshops B. regularly read professional or' technological journals, magazines _ . or publications take courses at university but not counting toward a degree or credential take courses at colleges-, or other post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s but not counting toward a degree or credential spend short amounts of time ( i . e . one to s i x weeks) i n industry, business, or health care organizations during breaks, holidays or one month , unspecified duties F. other (please specify and indicate importance for each) (1) 1 2 3 4 5 (2) ; 1 2 3 4 5 118. 18(b) Listed below are a c t i v i t i e s which generally require more time for faculty to upgrade or broaden their professional or technological knowledge or expertise. For each of the following a c t i v i t i e s please indicate your opinion of their importance and value for faculty. Very Some No Useful Use Use A. professional development leave of absence to gain experience i n busi-ness, engineering, health or academic organizations 1 2 3 4 5 B. educational leave of absence for study purposes (including independent study) 1 2 3 4 5 C. undertaking a diploma or degree program on a part-time basis 1 2 3 4 5 i D. writing a technical or professional paper 1 2 3 4 5 E. writing a manual, text or book 1 2 3 4 5 F. other (please specify and indicate importance for each) (1) 1 2 3 4 5 (2) 1 2 3 4 5 19 . Listed below are other ways faculty can keep i n contact with their profession or technology. For each item, please c i r c l e the number which best indicates, i n your opinion, the value and importance of these a c t i v i t i e s . Very Some No Useful Use Use A. informal discussions or v i s i t s with other faculty, professionals or technologists 1 2 3 4 5 B. membership i n professional or technological associations 1 2 3 4 5 C. attend meetings of the association or society 1 2 3 4 5 D. attend conferences or workshops 1 2 3 4 5 E. serve on professional or technological committees outside of ;the I n s t i t u t e ,.\ 1 2 3 4 5 F. regularly read professional or techno-l o g i c a l magazines or journals 1 2 3 4 5 G. other (please specify and indicate importance for each) (1) 1 2 3 4 5 (2) 1 2 3 4 5 119. 20(a) Consulting or part-time work i s another way faculty can keep i n contact with their profession or"technology. What value or importance do you think i t has? Very „ c .. Some L i t t l e No TT c i Useful T T ........ T T Useful Use .Use Use 1 2 3 4 5 (b) On the average, what percentage of time worked per week i s i t desirable for faculty to spend i n consulting or part-time work? (1) none (2) 1 to 20% . (3) 21 to 40% (4) 41 to 60% (5) 61 to 80% (6) 80 to 100% ACADEMIC QUESTIONS 21 . Please check what you think i s the minimal desirable educational attainment for faculty to have to teach your course(s) or technology? (1) Less than Grade XII or equivalent (2) Secondary school diploma (3) One year post-secondary diploma (4) Some university or college (but less than a degree) (5) two or three year post-secondary diploma ... (6) Bachelor degree (7) Master degree (8) Doctoral or Ph.D. degree (9) Other (please specify) 22. What i s your opinion of faculty engaging i n (during non-teaching time) research a c t i v i t i e s leading to new or improved processes, tools, techniques, methods or knowledge? .Very Valuable Some L i t t l e No Valuable Value Value Value 1 2 3 4 5 TEACHING QUESTIONS 23. Do you think i t desirable for faculty to have teaching experience before teaching at the Institute? (1) Yes (2) No - (3) Undecided If "Yes", how much teaching experience do you think i s desirable? (1) less than 1 year (2) 1 to 2 years 120. 23. Continued .. .. (3) 3 to 5 years (4) 6 to 10 years (5) 11 years or more .. Listed below are types of teaching experiences. For each of the following, please indicate your opinion of their importance and value. Very Some No Useful Use Use (A) elementary or junior secondary 1 2 3 4 5 (B) 1 2 3 4 5 (C) 1 2 3 4 5 (D) 1 2 3 4 5 (E) 1 2 3 4 5 (F) 1 2 3 4 5 24(a) How useful do you think i t would be for faculty to have credit courses i n instruction or education ( i . e . methodology of instruction) from a university or college to teach your courses or technology? Very Useful Useful 2 Some Use L i t t l e Use No Use (b) With reference to such a program of credit courses, how much importance and value should the following topics have for faculty to teach your technology or course (s)? For each item, please c i r c l e the number which best describes your opinion. Very Useful A. theories of learning applied to adults 1 2 B. in s t r u c t i o n a l objectives 1 2 C. preparation and use of course outlines 1 2 D. construction and assessment of tests or examinations 1 2 E. teaching techniques (lecture, discussions, seminars, f i e l d t r i p s , lab sessions, projects) 1 2 F. selection, development and use of audio-visual aids • 1 2 Some Use 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 No Use 5 5 5 5 5 5 121. 24(b) Continued Very Some No Useful Use Use G. diagnosis of learning and teaching , problems 1 2 3 4 5 H. philosophy and objectives of post-secondary educational i n s t i t u t i o n s 1 2 3 4 5 I. characteristics of technological, vocational and career students ... 1 2 3 4 5 J. other (please specify and indicate importance for each) (1) 1 2 3 4 5 (2) 1 2 3 4 5 (3) 1 2 3 4 5 25. How useful do you think i t would be for newly hired faculty, who lack teaching experience, to take a short ( i . e . one to four weeks) inservice teaching preparation course where they would have an opportunity to gain knowledge and give in s t r u c t i o n under supervision? Very T T c n Some L i t t l e No TT i Useful T T T T TT Useful Use Use Use 26. How useful do you think i t would be for newly hired faculty, who lack teaching experience, to receive assistance i n in s t r u c t i o n and teaching preparation from an experienced faculty member during his/her f i r s t year of teaching? Very T T ,, n Some L i t t l e No TT c i Useful T T T T TT Useful Use Use Use 1 2 3 . 4 5 27. Please check the lowest l e v e l of education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n or licencing you think i s desirable for faculty to have. (1) No education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n needed ... (2) Teaching Licence (3) Instructors' Diploma (4) Standard C e r t i f i c a t e (in teaching) (5) Professional C e r t i f i c a t e (in teaching) and/or Bachelor of Education Degree (6) Master , Degree of Education (M.A. or M.Ed.) (7) Doctoral Degree of Education (8) Other (please specify) GENERAL QUESTION 28. For the t o t a l amount of time worked during the ten month year (that includes the nine calendar months i n the academic year and the one month free of teaching and student evaluation duties), approximately what percentage of time do you think faculty should spend doing each of the following three kinds of a c t i v i t i e s ? For parts A, B and C please write the percentages i n the spaces provided. (A) teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s . (e.g. preparing for and giving classes, marking, counselling students, etc.) .... (B) academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s . (e.g. increasing th e i r academic or educational q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , doing research) (C) professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s , (e.g. keeping i n contact with the i r pro-fession or technology, broadening their professional or technological expertise, doing consulting or part-time work) % TOTAL = 100% 7° COMMENTS: Please use the space below for any comments you may wish to write. Please put your completed questionnaire i n the self-addressed envelope, seal i t and mail as soon as possible. Again, thank you very much for your help. 123. APPENDIX C QUESTIONNAIRE FOR THE ADMINISTRATORS DIRECTIONS ALL of the questions concern f i l l time, regular, day school teaching faculty. (Counsellors, support s t a f f , technical s t a f f , l i b r a r i a n s , industry services, health continuing education, and career program faculty are excluded and not referred to)) PERSONAL DATA Please indicate your area of administration. (1) P r i n c i p a l , Executive Director, or Day School Director of Core, Business, Engineering or Health (2) Department Head Please indicate your age. (1) 20-30.years ; __ (2) 31-40 years" '!' - -(3) 41-50 years (4) 51-60 years" (5) 61-65 years _____ TECHNOLOGICAL OR PROFESSIONAL QUESTIONS 3(a) Listed below are types of professional or technological work experiences faculty may have prior to joining the 'institute.'. For each item, please c i r c l e the number which best indicates your opinion of i t s value and importance to faculty. Very Some No Useful Use Use A. technician or technologist 1 2 3 4 5 B. practicing professional 1 2 3 4 5 C. administrator or supervisor 1 2 3 4 5 D. consultant 1 2 3 4 5 E. other (please specify and indicate importance) 124. 3(b) How much work experience related to the technologies or courses they teach i s most desirable for newly hired faculty? (1) none needed (2) less than 1 year (3) 1 to 2 years (4) 3 to 5 years (5) 6 to 10 years (6) 11 years or more What i s the minimal l e v e l of professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n (for those technologies requiring c e r t i f i c a t i o n ) desirable for faculty? (1) Basic professional or technological or diploma (e.g. R.N., R.T., C.G.A., R.I.A., P.. Eng.) (2) Basic t r a d e . c e r t i f i c a t i o n (Journeyman standing) (3) Advanced trade c e r t i f i c a t i o n or'diploma (Trade Extension) (4) Advanced professional or technological c e r t i f i c a t i o n (e.g. A.R.T., C.A., F.S.R., L.C.S.L.T.) (5) Other (please specify) 5(a) Listed below are a c t i v i t i e s faculty may engage i n to upgrade or broaden their technological or professional a b i l i t i e s . For each item, please c i r c l e the number which best indicates your opinion of i t s value and importance. Very Useful Some Use A. attend conferences or workshops B. regularly read professional or technological journals, magazines, or publications C. take courses at university but not counting toward -a degree or credential D. -.take courses at colleges, or other post-secondary i n s t i t u t i o n s but not counting"toward a degree or credential E. spend short amounts of time ( i . e . one to six weeks) i n industry, busi-ness, or health care organizations during breaks, holidays or one month unspecified duties F. other (please specify and indicate importance for each) (1) (2) 2 2 4 4 No Use 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 5 5 5(b) Listed below are a c t i v i t i e s which generally require more time for faculty to upgrade or broaden their professional or technological knowledge or expertise. For each of the following a c t i v i t i e s please indicate your opinion of their importance and value for faculty. Very Some No Useful Use Use A. professional development leave of absence to gain experience i n business, engineering, health or academic organizations 1 2 3 4 5 B. educational leave of absence for study purposes (including inde-pendent study) 1 2 3 4 5 C. undertaking a diploma or degree program on a part-time basis 1 2 3 4 5 D. writing a technical or profes-sional paper 1 2 3 4 5 E. writing a manual, text or book .... 1 2 3 4 5 F. other (please specify and indicate importance for each) (1) 1 2 3 4 5 (2) 1 2 3 4 5 6. Listed below are other ways faculty can keep i n contact with their profession or technology. For each item, please c i r c l e the number which best indicates i n your opinion, the value and importance to faculty. Very Some No Useful.; Use Use informal discussion or v i s i t s with other faculty, professionals or technologists membership i n professional or technological associations C. attend meetings of the association or society 1 2 3 4 5 D. .attend conferences or workshops .. 1 2 3 4 5 E. serve on professional or techno-l o g i c a l committees outside of the Institute , 1 2 3 4 5 regularly read professional or technological magazines or journals other (please specify and indicate importance for each) (1) 1 2 3 4 5 (2) 1 2 3 4 5 7(a) Consulting or part-time work i s another way faculty can keep i n contact with their profession or technology. What value or importance do you think i t has? Very T T .. Some L i t t l e No T T J Useful T T T T Useful Use Use Use 1 2 3 4 5 (b) On the average, what percentage of time worked per week i s i t desirable for faculty to spend i n consulting or part-time work? (1) None . .... (2) 1 to 20% . (3) 21 to 40% (4) 41 to 60% (5) 61 to 80% (6) 81 to 100% ACADEMIC QUESTIONS Please check what you think i s the minimal desirable educational attainment for faculty. (1 (2 (3 (4 (5 (6 (7 (8 Less than Grade XII or equivalent Secondary School diploma One year post-secondary diploma Some university or college (but less than a degree) Two to three year post-secondary diploma Bachelor ,.. degree Master'. degree Doctoral or Ph.D. degree What i s your opinion of faculty engaging i n (during non-teaching time) research a c t i v i t i e s leading to new or improved processes, tools, techniques, methods or knowledge? Very . Valuable Some L i t t l e No Valuable Value Value Value TEACHING QUESTIONS 10. Do you think i t desirable for faculty to have teaching experience before teaching at the Institute? (1) Yes ..., (2) No (3) Undecided If "Yes", how much teaching experience do you think i s desirable? (1) Less than 1 year (2) 1 to 2 years (3) 3 to 5 years (4) 6 to 10 years (5) 11 years or more . . 127. 10. Continued Listed below are types of teaching experiences. For each of the following, please indicate your opinion of their importance and value. Very Some No Useful Use Use (A) .elementary or junior secondary 1 2 3 4 5 (B) 1 2 3 4 5 (C) 1 2 3 4 5 (D) 1 2 3 4 5 (E) 1 2 3 4 5 (F) 1 2 3 4 5 11(a) How useful do you think i t would be for faculty to have credit courses i n i n s t r u c t i o n or education ( i . e . methodology of instruction) from a university or college? Very Useful Useful 2 Some Use L i t t l e Use No Use (b) With reference to such a program of credit courses, how much importance and value should the following topics have for faculty? For each item, please c i r c l e the number which best describes your opinion. A. theories of learning applied to adults B. i n s t r u c t i o n a l objectives C. preparation and use of course outlines D. construction and assessment of tests or examinations E. teaching techniques (lectures, discussions, seminars, f i e l d t r i p s , lab sessions, projects F. selection, development and use of audio-visual aids G. diagnosis of learning and teaching problems Very Useful 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Some Use 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 No Use 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 128. 11(b) Continued H. philosophy and objectives of post-secondary educational i n s t i t u t i o n s I. characteristics of technological, vocational, and career students ... J. other (please specify and indicate importance for each) (1) (2) (3) Very Useful 1 1 1 Some Use 4 4 4 No Use 12. How useful do you think i t would be for newly hired faculty, who lack teaching experience, to take a short ( i . e . one to four weeks) inservice teaching preparation course where they would have an opportunity to gain knowledge and give i n s t r u c t i o n under supervision? Very T T - .. Some L i t t l e No TT c \ Useful TT T T T T Useful Use Use Use 1 2 3 4 5 13. How useful do you think i t would be for newly hired faculty, who lack teaching experience, to receive assistance i n in s t r u c t i o n and teaching preparation from an experienced faculty member during his/her f i r s t year of teaching? Very T T r ., Some L i t t l e No TT /. Useful T1 T T TT Useful Use Use Use 1 2 3 4 5 14. Please check the lowest l e v e l of education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n or licencing you think i s desirable for faculty to have. , (1) No education or teaching c e r t i f i c a t i o n needed (2) Teaching Licence (3) Instructors' Diploma (4) Standard C e r t i f i c a t i o n (in teaching) (5) Professional C e r t i f i c a t e (in teaching) and/or Bachelor of Education Degree (6) Master Degree of Education (M.A. or M.Ed.) . (7) Doctoral of Education Degree (8) Other (please specify) GENERAL QUESTION 15. For the t o t a l amount of time worked during the ten month year (that includes the nine calendar months i n the academic year and the one month free of teaching and student evaluation duties), approximately what percentage of time do you think faculty should spend doing each of the following three kinds of a c t i v i t i e s ? For parts A, B and C please write the percentages i n the spaces provided. (A) teaching and related a c t i v i t i e s , '(e.g. preparing for and giving classes, marking, counselling students, etc.) (B) academic and scholarly a c t i v i t i e s , (e.g. increasing th e i r academic or educational q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , doing research.) (C) professional or technologist a c t i v i t i e s , (e.g. keeping i n contact with th e i r profession or technology, broadening thei r professional or technological expertise, doing consulting or part-time work.) TOTAL = 100% COMMENTS: Please use the space below for any comments you may wish to write. Please put your completed questionnaire i n the self-addressed envelope, seal and mail i t as soon as possible. Again, thank you very much for your help. APPENDIX D COVERING AND FOLLOW-UP LETTERS FOR THE FACULTY A p r i l , 1977 Dear I am a faculty member at the Institute on a one year educational sabbatical.. For my Master's thesis i n Higher Education, I am studying the i d e n t i t y of faculty i n technological i n s t i t u t i o n s as perceived by faculty and administrators themselves. In contrast to faculty i n other types of post-secondary education, l i t t l e i s known about faculty i n technological i n s t i t u t i o n s . "The I n s t i t u t e , with i t s technological focus, i s an unique i n s t i t u t i o n i n this province. Data collected from the Institute faculty and administration w i l l begin to provide systematic information about faculty i n technological i n s t i t u t i o n s . The enclosed questionnaire i s directed toward providing data i n three areas: (1) teacher, (2) professional or technologist, and (3) academic. Also, the questionnaire i s i n two sections. In the f i r s t section you are asked about your current i d e n t i t y , regarding these areas. In the second section, questions are asked on what i s desirable or important for faculty. I would l i k e to e n l i s t your help by asking you to share your opinions to these questions i n Sections I and I I , using the enclosed questionnaire. Anonymity i s ensured; you w i l l never be i d e n t i f i e d with your responses. Therefore, do not hesitate to be candid i n your opinions. Please do riot discuss the questions with your colleagues as your indi v i d u a l response i s important. Would you please complete the questionnaire, and mail i t at your e a r l i e s t convenience i n the self-addressed envelope provided? The v a l i d i t y of this study and the data which stems from i t are most dependent upon a high return rate of questionnaires. Consequently, your e f f o r t s toward attaining this goal are very much valued. I know your'time i s limited and I would be deeply appreciative i f you would take the time to f i l l out and mail the questionnaire as soon as possible. Yours sincerely, Beverley M. Alder APPENDIX D COVERING AND FOLLOW-UP LETTERS FOR THE FACULTY May, 1977 Dear Recently I sent you the "Faculty Opinions and Characteristics Question-naire" to gather data for my Master's thesis i n Higher Education. I am using the questionnaire responses to provide data on teacher, professional or technologist, and academic i d e n t i t i e s of faculty i n technological i n s t i t u t i o n s . To date a portion of the questionnaires have been received. However, a l l responses are highly valued. Because questionnaire returns are anonymous I do not know which faculty members have already responded. If you have not yet completed your questionnaire would you please complete and mail i t by the end of this week? If you have already mailed your questionnaire please ignore this l e t t e r . Should the e a r l i e r materials have gone astray, or i f you have not yet received them, would you please c a l l me at my home on May 3rd, 4th, or 5th (Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday) between the hours of 8:30 A.M. and 2:30 P.M. and I w i l l be happy to deliver the questionnaire and self-addressed return envelope to you. Thank you very much for your assistance. Yours, sincerely, Beverley M. Alder 132. APPENDIX E COVERING AND FOLLOW-UP LETTERS FOR THE ADMINISTRATORS A p r i l , 1977 Dear I am a faculty member at the I n s t i t u t e on ,a one year educational sabbatical. For my Master's thesis i n Higher Education, I am studying the characteristics of faculty i n technological i n s t i t u t i o n s as perceived by administrators and faculty themselves. In contrast to faculty i n other types of post-secondary education, l i t t l e i s known about faculty i n technological i n s t i t u t i o n s . The Institute, with i t s technological focus, i s an. unique"" i n s t i t u t i o n i n this., province. Data collected from the I n s t i t u t e faculty and administration w i l l begin to provide systematic information about faculty i n technological i n s t i t u t i o n s . The enclosed questionnaire i s directed toward providing data i n three areas: (1) teacher, (2) professional or technologist, and (3) academic. Questions on what i s desirable or important for faculty i n these areas are asked. I would l i k e to e n l i s t your help by asking you to share your opinions to these questions using the enclosed questionnaire. Anonymity i s ensured; you w i l l never be i d e n t i f i e d with your responses. Therefore, do not hesitate to be candid i n your opinions. Please do not discuss the questions with your colleagues as your individual response i s important. Would you please complete the questionnaire, and mail i t at your e a r l i e s t convenience i n the self-addressed envelope provided? The v a l i d i t y of this study and the data which stems from, i t are most dependent upon a high return rate of questionnaires. Consequently, your ef f o r t s toward attaining this goal are very much valued. I know your time i s limited and I would be deeply appreciative i f you would take the time to f i l l out and mail the questionnaire as soon as possible. Yours sincerely, Beverley M. Alder APPENDIX E COVERING AND FOLLOW-UP LETTERS FOR THE ADMINISTRATORS May, 1977 Dear Recently I sent you the "Opinions Questionnaire for Administrators" to gather data for my Master's thesis i n Higher Education. I am using the questionnaire responses to provide data on the character-i s t i c s of faculty i n technological i n s t i t u t i o n s as perceived by administrators. To date a portion of the questionnaires have been received. However, a l l responses are highly valued. Because questionnaire returns are anonymous I do not know which administrators have already responded. If you have not yet completed your questionnaire would you please complete and mail i t by the end of this week? If you have already mailed your questionnaire please ignore t h i s l e t t e r . Should the e a r l i e r materials have gone astray, or i f you have not yet received them, I have enclosed another questionnaire, explanatory l e t t e r , and return envelope for your convenience. Thank you very much for your assistance. Yours sincerely, Beverley M. Alder 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0055781/manifest

Comment

Related Items