UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Faculty vitality in two community colleges : factors reported by instructors as affecting their productivity Sheridan, Casey John 1990

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1990_A8 S53.pdf [ 4.9MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0055838.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0055838-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0055838-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0055838-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0055838-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0055838-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0055838-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0055838-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0055838.ris

Full Text

FACULTY VITALITY IN TWO COMMUNITY COLLEGES: FACTORS REPORTED BY INSTRUCTORS AS AFFECTING THEIR PRODUCTIVITY by CASEY JOHN SHERIDAN B.A., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1969 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Administrative, Adult and Higher Education) We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA March 1990 © Casey John Sheridan, 1990 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. (Signature) C A S E Y J O H N S H E R I D A N Department of A D M I N I S T R A T I V E , A D U L T A N D H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada D a t e MARCH 11 . 1990 DE-6 (2/88) i i ABSTRACT T h i s study i n v e s t i g a t e d community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y from w i t h i n the o v e r a l l c o n t e x t o f f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y . The study was conducted a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e i n A b b o t s f o r d and C h i l l i w a c k , B r i t i s h Columbia, and Red Deer C o l l e g e i n Red Deer, A l b e r t a . Two r e s e a r c h problems were addressed. F i r s t , which work r e l a t e d f a c t o r s , as r e p o r t e d by c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y a t the two community c o l l e g e s , f a c i l i t a t e d or h i n d e r e d the p r o d u c t i v i t y of i n s t r u c t o r s ? Second, t o what ext e n t are a composite s e t of f a c t o r s , based on those suggested i n the l i t e r a t u r e as a f f e c t i n g f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y , p e r c e i v e d by f a c u l t y a t these c o l l e g e s t o a f f e c t t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y ? The r e s e a r c h was d e s c r i p t i v e , extending f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y and v i t a l i t y i n q u i r y i n t o the community c o l l e g e c o n t e x t u s i n g a case study approach. A q u e s t i o n n a i r e employing the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t technique was used t o c o l l e c t d a t a from f a c u l t y about i n c i d e n t s they p e r c e i v e d as h a v i n g had a p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . A d e f i n i t i o n of community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y f o r use i n the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t p r o c e s s was developed u s i n g a 12 member D e l p h i group c o n s i s t i n g o f t h r e e f a c u l t y and t h r e e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s from each c o l l e g e . R a t i n g of the composite s e t of v i t a l i t y f a c t o r s was accomplished by a s k i n g the respondents t o r a t e each f a c t o r on a f i v e p o i n t i i i bipolar rating scale based on their perception of the p r i o r i t y each factor had in affecting their productivity. The 330 incidents collected by the questionnaire (171 f a c i l i t a t i n g , 159 hindering) were c lass i f ied into 15 incident categories which in turn were able to be grouped into four major areas each of which provides a theme for the related categories they contain. A l l factors in the composite set of v i t a l i t y related factors received a minimum mean rating of three on the five point scale. Conclusions drawn include: (1) the frequency of incidents by category should not be the only measure of category importance because frequencies may vary by ins t i tut ion , by instructor, and over time; (2) the categories ref lect an open rather than closed c lass i f i cat ion system and as such are interrelated; (3) the categories ref lect both fac i l i t a t ing and hindering incidents; (4) factors suggested by the l i terature as affecting v i t a l i t y are perceived by faculty to affect their productivity but these results may hide a diversity of views for a particular situation; (5) the factors identif ied as f a c i l i t a t i n g or hindering community college faculty productivity should not be interpreted as applicable in a l l situations or for a l l faculty. Research results suggest increased awareness by administrators (at the colleges in the study) of the faci l i tat ing/hindering productivity factor category scheme s h o u l d l e a d t o a working environment more f a c i l i t a t i v e t o f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y i f e i t h e r f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s are i n c r e a s e d and/or h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s are reduced. The p r o d u c t i v i t y f a c t o r assessment s e c t i o n of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e s u l t s suggests a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a t the two c o l l e g e s s h o u l d be s e n s i t i v e t o any a c t i o n s which are p e r c e i v e d as undermining q u a l i t y of performance. V CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT i i LIST OF TABLES v i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v i i i CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Context of the Study 1 Problem Statements and Research Questions 3 S i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h i s Study 5 2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE D e f i n i t i o n s o f F a c u l t y V i t a l i t y 6 Expanding V i t a l i t y D e f i n i t i o n s 8 V i t a l i t y / P r o d u c t i v i t y P e r s p e c t i v e s 11 V i t a l i t y / P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r s 13 C o n c l u s i o n 14 3. METHODOLOGY P o p u l a t i o n and Sample 16 Research Design and Procedures 17 Pe r s o n a l P r o f i l e 18 P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r I d e n t i f i c a t i o n 20 C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t Method 21 D e l p h i Process 24 P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r Assessment 31 v i 4. FINDINGS D e l p h i Process 33 P r o f i l e o f Respondents 35 F a c t o r s F a c i l i t a t i n g and H i n d e r i n g P r o d u c t i v i t y 44 I n t e r a c t i o n w i t h Others 47 Resources 49 Processes and P o l i c i e s 51 Work A c t i v i t i e s 53 V i t a l i t y F a c t o r s A f f e c t i n g P r o d u c t i v i t y 57 Supplemental Analyses 60 R e l i a b i l i t y and V a l i d i t y 61 5. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION Summary 67 Co n c l u s i o n s and I m p l i c a t i o n s 69 P o s s i b l e A p p l i c a t i o n s 74 L i m i t a t i o n s o f T h i s Study 76 Recommendations f o r Future Research 77 REFERENCES 79 APPENDICES A. DELPHI GROUP RECRUITMENT LETTERS AND 85 AGREEMENT FORMS B. DELPHI GROUP OUTGOING AND INCOMING 96 COMMUNICATION C. LETTER REQUESTING PARTICIPATION IN 119 PILOT SURVEY D. QUESTIONNAIRES, COVERING LETTERS AND 121 FOLLOW-UP LETTERS v i i LIST OF TABLES T a b l e Page 1. VITALITY FACTORS FROM THE LITERATURE 32 2. COMPARISON OF RESPONSES TO ROUNDS TWO AND FOUR 35 3. COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY PRODUCTIVITY DEFINITION 36 4. SAMPLING FRAME ADJUSTMENTS 37 5. QUESTIONNAIRE RETURN RATE 38 6. SEX OF RESPONDENTS 39 7. RESPONDENTS VERSUS ADJUSTED SAMPLING FRAME 39 8. AGE OF RESPONDENTS 40 9. CURRENT MAIN TEACHING AREA 41 10. CURRENT COLLEGE POSITION 42 11. LENGTH OF EMPLOYMENT WITH COLLEGE AS INSTRUCTORS 43 12. FACILITATING AND HINDERING INCIDENT CATEGORIES 46 13. FREQUENCY OF FACILITATING AND HINDERING INCIDENTS 56 14. PRODUCTIVITY FACTOR MEANS 59 15. CATEGORIZATION BY DELPHI RESPONDENTS 62 16. SUMMARY OF FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTIVITY 69 v i i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would l i k e t o thank John Dennison, my t h e s i s s u p e r v i s o r , and the members of my committee f o r t h e i r support and guidance i n the completion of t h i s r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t . A p p r e c i a t i o n i s a l s o expressed t o F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and f a c u l t y f o r t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n . Most of a l l , I wish t o acknowledge the support and und e r s t a n d i n g p r o v i d e d by my w i f e , Pam, and our c h i l d r e n , Sarah and Matthew, w h i l e I worked on my degree. Only t h e y know the number of evening, weekend and v a c a t i o n hours i t took b e f o r e I was f i n a l l y a b l e t o say, " I t ' s f i n i s h e d ! " 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Context of the Study F a c u l t y v i t a l i t y has r e c e i v e d i n c r e a s i n g a t t e n t i o n d u r i n g r e c e n t y e a r s . T h i s i s i l l u s t r a t e d by Bland and Schmitz (1988, p. 202) who reviewed 287 p u b l i c a t i o n s on f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and development w r i t t e n between the ye a r s 1965-1985. They noted 93% of the papers were produced d u r i n g the second decade covered by t h e i r study; i n f a c t , 50% were p u b l i s h e d a f t e r 1980. Reasons why f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y i s s u e s are of concern can be c l a s s i f i e d i n t o two r e l a t e d p e r s p e c t i v e s . The f i r s t emphasizes human development i n the con t e x t o f o r g a n i z a t i o n s and s o c i e t y . Gardner (1964, p. 2) e x e m p l i f i e s t h i s p o s i t i o n by s t a t i n g s o c i e t y decays when i n s t i t u t i o n s and i n d i v i d u a l s l o s e t h e i r v i t a l i t y . In s a y i n g , "we must d i s c o v e r how t o d e s i g n o r g a n i z a t i o n s and t e c h n o l o g i c a l systems i n such a way t h a t i n d i v i d u a l t a l e n t s are used t o the maximum and human s a t i s f a c t i o n and d i g n i t y p r e s e r v e d , " he emphasizes f u l l development of people f o r p r o d u c t i v e r o l e s i n o r g a n i z a t i o n s but not a t the expense of the i n d i v i d u a l (Gardner, 1964, p. 64). T h i s view i s put i n t o a h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n c o n t e x t by Cares and Blackburn (1978, p. 135) who s t a t e i n s t i t u t i o n s s h o u l d have f u l l growth and development of human r e s o u r c e s 2 embodied i n t h e i r o p e r a t i o n a l processes as w e l l as i n the focus o f t h e i r m i s s i o n . The second p e r s p e c t i v e on v i t a l i t y , and the one on which t h i s r e s e a r c h i s c e n t r e d , emphasizes the l i n k between v i t a l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y . In the p a s t , r e v i t a l i z a t i o n o f i n d i v i d u a l s and i n s t i t u t i o n s o c c u r r e d through f a c u l t y m o b i l i t y ; c u r r e n t and p r o j e c t e d r e l a t i v e i m m o b i l i t y o f f a c u l t y has c r e a t e d concern over how p r o d u c t i v i t y can now be maintained. T h i s view c o n s i d e r s decreased demand f o r f a c u l t y a problem a f f e c t i n g p r o d u c t i v i t y , a r i s i n g p r i m a r i l y from demographic and economic changes which caused d e c l i n i n g o r s t a t i c enrolment, program demand s h i f t s , and decreased i n f u s i o n o f young f a c u l t y (Carnegie C o u n c i l on P o l i c y S t u d i e s i n Higher Education, 1980; C l a r k , Boyer and Corcoran, 1985; Hansen, 1985). Gaff (1978, p. 1) i n d i c a t e s t h a t i n time of zero growth c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s must r e l y on t h e i r c u r r e n t f a c u l t y t o "provide f r e s h p e r s p e c t i v e s , i n f u s e new i d e a s , and g i v e l e a d e r s h i p t o i n n o v a t i v e programs i f they are t o m a i n t a i n v i g o r o u s e d u c a t i o n a l c l i m a t e s . " K i r s c h l i n g ' s (1978, p. v i i i ) views "that f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y i s a t the h e a r t o f e d u c a t i o n a l e n t e r p r i s e " and "that f a c u l t y performance and v i t a l i t y s h ould be c o n s i d e r e d t o g e t h e r " echo the l i n k s between f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y . These l i n k s are f u r t h e r strengthened by C l a r k , Boyer and Corcoran (1985, p. 3) who say " v i t a l i t y r e f e r s t o those 3 e s s e n t i a l , y e t i n t a n g i b l e p o s i t i v e q u a l i t i e s of i n d i v i d u a l s and i n s t i t u t i o n s t h a t enable p u r p o s e f u l p r o d u c t i o n " and by the Minnesota P l a n n i n g C o u n c i l ( c i t e d i n C l a r k , Boyer & Corcoran, 1985) which emphasized " s u s t a i n e d p r o d u c t i v i t y " i n d i s c u s s i n g v i t a l i t y . In summary, f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y i s important because: 1. e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s s hould be i n t e r e s t e d i n human development and growth f o r t h e i r f a c u l t y , a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and support s t a f f as w e l l as t h e i r s t u d e n t s , and 2. maintenance of f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y i s c o n s i d e r e d c l o s e l y l i n k e d w i t h the development and maintenance of a v i t a l f a c u l t y . Problem Statements and Research Questions As i l l u s t r a t e d above, the l i t e r a t u r e r e f l e c t s a v e r y c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p between v i t a l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y , so c l o s e i t i s suggested the concepts should be c o n s i d e r e d t o g e t h e r i n s t e a d of s e p a r a t e l y . I t i s , t h e r e f o r e , from w i t h i n the o v e r a l l c o n t e x t o f f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y t h a t t h i s study focused on f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y a t two community c o l l e g e s : F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e w i t h campuses i n A b b o t s f o r d and C h i l l i w a c k , B r i t i s h Columbia and Red Deer C o l l e g e i n Red Deer, A l b e r t a . 4 The f i r s t r e s e a r c h problem was t o determine which work r e l a t e d f a c t o r s , as r e p o r t e d by f a c u l t y members a t these community c o l l e g e s , f a c i l i t a t e d o r h i n d e r e d the p r o d u c t i v i t y o f i n s t r u c t o r s . The second problem was t o i n v e s t i g a t e the e x t e n t t o which a composite s e t of f a c t o r s , based on those suggested i n the l i t e r a t u r e as a f f e c t i n g v i t a l i t y , was p e r c e i v e d by f a c u l t y t o a f f e c t t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . The f i r s t problem was i n v e s t i g a t e d by a d d r e s s i n g the r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s below. 1: Which work r e l a t e d f a c t o r s , as r e p o r t e d by f u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e , f a c i l i t a t e d f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y a t t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c o l l e g e s ? 2: Which work r e l a t e d f a c t o r s , as r e p o r t e d by f u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e , h i n d e r e d f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y a t t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c o l l e g e s ? The second problem was i n v e s t i g a t e d by a d d r e s s i n g the f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n . 3: To what degree are f a c t o r s suggested i n the l i t e r a t u r e as a f f e c t i n g f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y p e r c e i v e d by f u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e as a f f e c t i n g t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y ? S i g n i f i c a n c e of t h i s Study 5 Numerous papers have been p u b l i s h e d on f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y • and p r o d u c t i v i t y but i t i s s t i l l not c l e a r whether t h e i r f i n d i n g s and recommendations apply t o community c o l l e g e s as w e l l as u n i v e r s i t i e s and f o u r year c o l l e g e s . Bland and Schmitz (1988/ p. 191), i n t h e i r survey of the l i t e r a t u r e d e a l i n g w i t h f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y , r e s t r i c t e d t h e i r study t o u n i v e r s i t i e s , f o u r - y e a r c o l l e g e s , and p r o f e s s i o n a l s c h o o l s i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s . T h i s r e s t r i c t i o n r e f l e c t s the emphasis i n the l i t e r a t u r e ; i t d e a l s predominantly w i t h f o u r - y e a r i n s t i t u t i o n s w i t h o n l y an o c c a s i o n a l r e f e r e n c e t o d a t a from community c o l l e g e s . In s p i t e o f the d e a r t h of data p e r t a i n i n g t o community c o l l e g e s , the s i m i l a r i t i e s among u n i v e r s i t i e s , f o u r - y e a r c o l l e g e s and community c o l l e g e s encourage acceptance o f the f i n d i n g s as r e l e v a n t and a p p l i c a b l e t o community c o l l e g e s . But the d i f f e r e n c e s - p a r t i c u l a r l y the l a c k o f r e s e a r c h r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and the two year program l i m i t i n community c o l l e g e s - are s u f f i c i e n t reason t o undertake community c o l l e g e s p e c i f i c r e s e a r c h . The r e s u l t i n g f i n d i n g s s h o u l d c o n t r i b u t e t o understanding f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y i n community c o l l e g e s and suggest p o s s i b l e p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n s . 6 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE D e f i n i t i o n s of F a c u l t y V i t a l i t y C orcoran and C l a r k (1983, p. 6) i n d i c a t e d t h a t o f t e n no attempt i s made t o d e f i n e the concept of v i t a l i t y , t h a t perhaps an assumption e x i s t s t h a t the term i s understood. For example, a r e c e n t p u b l i c a t i o n on f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y (Bland & Schmitz, 1988, p. 191) c o n s i d e r s f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and i n s t i t u t i o n a l renewal as the new "buzz words" which have r e p l a c e d the narrower term f a c u l t y development. Nonetheless, as a d e f i n i t i o n o f v i t a l i t y i t quotes C l a r k , Boyer and Corcoran (1985, p. 3), s a y i n g " v i t a l i t y r e f e r s t o those e s s e n t i a l , y e t i n t a n g i b l e p o s i t i v e q u a l i t i e s o f i n d i v i d u a l s and i n s t i t u t i o n s t h a t enable p u r p o s e f u l p r o d u c t i o n . " The most comprehensive r e c e n t attempt a t d e f i n i n g f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y was c a r r i e d out by C l a r k , Boyer and Corcoran (1985, p. 6-10). T h e i r summary of v i t a l i t y d e f i n i t i o n s focused on s i x sources. The f i r s t was Gardner ( c i t e d i n C l a r k , Boyer & Corcoran, 1985) who used terms such as v i t a l i t y , renewal and r e g e n e r a t i o n . H i s c e n t r a l i d e a i n v o l v e d the " c a p a c i t i e s o f i n d i v i d u a l s , i n s t i t u t i o n s , and s o c i e t i e s f o r a d a p t a t i o n and change." The second, Peterson and Loye ( c i t e d i n C l a r k , 7 Boyer & Corcoran, 1985), d e a l t w i t h i n s t i t u t i o n a l v i t a l i t y and suggested a d e f i n i t i o n should be " m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l , dynamic, i n c l u d e i n d i v i d u a l v i t a l i t y , and a l l o w f o r i n s t i t u t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s . " Ebben and Maher ( c i t e d i n C l a r k , Boyer & Corcoran, 1985), the t h i r d source, a l s o d e a l t w i t h i n s t i t u t i o n a l v i t a l i t y and viewed i t as the " i n t e r a c t i o n o f m i s s i o n , g o a l s , programs, and i n s t i t u t i o n a l c l i m a t e t h a t enable i n d i v i d u a l s both t o c o n t r i b u t e t o the m i s s i o n and t o r e a l i z e the b e n e f i t s t h a t come from 'a c r e a t i v e , p r o d u c t i v e and e n e r g i z i n g work l i f e . ' " I n s t i t u t i o n a l v i t a l i t y was again the emphasis when Maher ( c i t e d i n C l a r k , Boyer & Corcoran, 1985) "added focus on i n d i v i d u a l s w i t h i n an i n s t i t u t i o n a l c o n t e x t " t o what he and Ebben had formulated i n 1979. Corcoran's and C l a r k ' s l a s t two sources c e n t r e d on f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y . Smith ( c i t e d i n C l a r k , Boyer & Corcoran, 1985) emphasized the i n t e r a c t i o n o f f a c u l t y and i n s t i t u t i o n a l v i t a l i t y . The U n i v e r s i t y o f Minnesota P l a n n i n g C o u n c i l ( c i t e d i n C l a r k , Boyer & Corcoran, 1985) h i g h l i g h t e d " ' s u s t a i n e d p r o d u c t i v i t y ' i n t e a c h i n g , [and] r e s e a r c h a c t i v i t i e s w i t h focus on the f a c u l t y as a c o l l e c t i v e . " C l a r k , Boyer and Corcoran (1985, p. 10) f e l t the u n d e r l y i n g theme i n the above was t h a t f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y seems t o be con t e x t s p e c i f f i c a n d d e f i n i t i o n s of v i t a l i t y must r e f l e c t both i n s t i t u t i o n a l type and m i s s i o n . As a l r e a d y s t a t e d , C l a r k , Boyer and Corcoran (1985, p. 3) 8 concluded " v i t a l i t y r e f e r s t o those e s s e n t i a l , y e t i n t a n g i b l e , p o s i t i v e q u a l i t i e s o f i n d i v i d u a l s and i n s t i t u t i o n s t h a t enable p u r p o s e f u l p r o d u c t i o n . " Expanding V i t a l i t y D e f i n i t i o n s A review of a d d i t i o n a l l i t e r a t u r e shows v i t a l i t y i s c o n s i d e r e d t o i n v o l v e the concepts of energy, s e l f - r e n e w a l , o p p o r t u n i t y , and f u l f i l l m e n t - perhaps the i n t a n g i b l e p o s i t i v e q u a l i t i e s r e f e r r e d t o above. More than a n y t h i n g e l s e , v i t a l i t y i n v o l v e s the e x i s t e n c e of energy. Whether, f o r example, v i g o u r and v i t a l i t y a re l i n k e d as done by Gardner (1978, p. 71) o r whether, as Smith (1978, p. 1) i n d i c a t e s , "the s e a r c h i s f o r energy t o some purpose," the concept of energy pervades the v i t a l i t y l i t e r a t u r e . Centra (1978b, p. 32) connects energy and m o t i v a t i o n . M o t i v a t i o n , w h i l e o n l y r e f e r r e d t o i n p a s s i n g by Gardner i n i t i a l l y (1964, p. 16; 1978, p. 147), i s subsequently s i n g l e d out by him (1981, p. x i i ) as u n i q u e l y important f o r renewal and v i t a l i t y . More f r e q u e n t l y , however, the term energy i s used t o express what can be i n t e r p r e t e d as v i t a l i t y . For example, McKeachie (1983, p. 64) r e f e r s t o " c o n d i t i o n s t h a t can r e l e a s e f a c u l t y energy," Bess (1982, p. 215) looks t o "development of a more e n e r g e t i c and f u l f i l l e d academic s t a f f , " and Ebben and Maher 9 ( c i t e d i n C l a r k , Boyer & Corcoran, 1985) r e f e r t o an " e n e r g i z i n g work l i f e . " A l o n g w i t h the e x i s t e n c e of energy, v i t a l i t y i s seen t o i n v o l v e the c a p a c i t y f o r change o r renewal. In the i n t r o d u c t i o n t o h i s r e v i s e d e d i t i o n o f Self-Renewal, Gardner (1981, p. x i ) s t a t e s , "There's something i n us t h a t f i e r c e l y r e s i s t s change. And t h e r e ' s something e l s e i n us t h a t welcomes i t , f i n d s i t b r a c i n g , even seeks i t out. I t ' s the l a t t e r t r a i t t h a t keeps the s p e c i e s going." Kanter (1983, p. 212) f e e l s t h a t " c r e a t i v e change can be enormously c a p t i v a t i n g and e n e r g i z i n g . " Newell and Spear (1983, p. I l l ) see a marked s t i m u l a t i o n r e s u l t i n g from new s i t u a t i o n s and demands. Blackburn (1985, p. 79) puts t h i s i n terms o f r e i n v i g o r a t i n g the i n d i v i d u a l . S o r c i n e l l i (1986, p. 14), i n d i s c u s s i n g s a b b a t i c a l s and l e a v e s , r e p o r t s "that o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o l e a r n new t h i n g s , t o take on new c h a l l e n g e s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . . . are e s s e n t i a l t o m a i n t a i n i n g f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y . " Change i s a l s o r e f e r r e d t o i n o t h e r terms. Gardner ( c i t e d i n C e n t r a , 1985) speaks of the need f o r continuous renewal. S i m i l a r l y , growth and development appear t o be r e l a t e d t o change. Sarason (1977, p. 101) r e f e r s t o "the excitement of growth and l e a r n i n g . " Bess (1982, p. 214-15) p r o j e c t s "continued p r o f e s s i o n a l and p e r s o n a l growth and development" w i l l r e s u l t from h i s concept of u n i v e r s i t y o r g a n i z a t i o n which w i l l no l o n g e r t r a p people but permit 10 them t o f o l l o w t h e i r i m a g i n a t i o n s . Schneider and Z a l e s n y (1981, p. 9 ) , approaching the i s s u e from a needs and m o t i v a t i o n s p e r s p e c t i v e , f e e l "the nature o f the academic environment a t t r a c t s people who tend' t o be o r i e n t e d t o c o n t i n u e d i d e n t i t y development." V i t a l i t y a l s o seems t o i n v o l v e the p e r c e p t i o n o f o p p o r t u n i t y . Kanter (1977, p. 158) concluded " o p p o r t u n i t y s t r u c t u r e s shape behavior i n such a way t h a t they c o n f i r m t h e i r own p r o p h e c i e s . " In oth e r words, those p e r c e i v i n g o p p o r t u n i t i e s develop h i g h e r a s p i r a t i o n s and are more i n v o l v e d i n t h e i r work than those who f e e l b l o c k e d i n t h e i r c a r e e r . T h i s r e s u l t e d from r e s e a r c h on those whom Kanter (1977, p. 135) d e s c r i b e d as stuck, "people w i t h low c e i l i n g s i n t h e i r j o b s , the people a t dead ends." Gardner (1981, p. x i i ) i n a more g e n e r a l c o n t e x t f e l t " i f people a r e . . . unable t o imagine a f u t u r e worth s t r i v i n g f o r , the game i s l o s t . " S c h u r r (1980, p. 8), b u i l d i n g on Ranter's work, concluded "expanding c a r e e r h o r i z o n s f o r p r o f e s s o r s i s p r o b a b l y i n s e p a r a b l e from r e v i t a l i z i n g t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l environments." Baldwin and Blackburn (1981, p. 611) i n t u r n s t r e s s e d "the need t o m a i n t a i n o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r ongoing c a r e e r growth." F i n a l l y , v i t a l i t y , i n a d d i t i o n t o c o n t a i n i n g the dimensions of energy, s e l f - r e n e w a l and o p p o r t u n i t y as d i s c u s s e d above, i n v o l v e s a sense of f u l f i l l m e n t , s a t i s f a c t i o n o r enjoyment. McKeachie (1979, p. 5 ) , 11 commenting on the problem of a l a c k of energy o r i n s u f f i c i e n t a l l o c a t i o n of energy t o a t a s k suggested one t h i n k "about those c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the work one wants done t h a t are fun - t h a t w i l l arouse i n t e r e s t o r t h a t w i l l spark c u r i o s i t y . " Bess (1982, p. 214) sees a " v i t a l l i n k between i n d i v i d u a l s a t i s f a c t i o n i n work and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l p r o d u c t i v i t y and q u a l i t y . " Baldwin and Blackburn (1981, p. 612) suggest f a c u l t y w i l l g a i n s a t i s f a c t i o n from r e g u l a r c a r e e r renewal through p r o f e s s i o n a l growth. Boberg and B l a c k b u r n (1983, p. 9), i n a study of f a c u l t y work d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n s and concerns f o r q u a l i t y , found i n t r i n s i c d e s i r e s f o r s e l f - f u l f i l l m e n t throughout t h e i r d a t a . The P l a n n i n g C o u n c i l at the U n i v e r s i t y of Minnesota ( c i t e d i n C orcoran and C l a r k , 1983) sums up t h i s view w e l l when i t says "perhaps most important a f a c u l t y i s v i t a l i f i t s members f i n d t h e i r work s t i m u l a t i n g , e n j o y a b l e and s a t i s f y i n g . " V i t a l i t y / P r o d u c t i v i t y P e r s p e c t i v e s As shown above, the l i t e r a t u r e i d e n t i f i e s and l i n k s the a b s t r a c t concepts of energy, s e l f - r e n e w a l , o p p o r t u n i t y and f u l f i l l m e n t t o v i t a l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y . I t tends t o be l e s s c l e a r , however, i n i d e n t i f y i n g g e n e r a l p e r s p e c t i v e s o r approaches which d i f f e r e n t i a t e s t r a t e g i e s f o r m a i n t a i n i n g v i t a l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y . As such i t i s h e l p f u l t o a t 12 l e a s t review the major s t r a t e g y p e r s p e c t i v e s ( e x t r i n s i c , i n t r i n s i c , developmental, and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e ) which appear t o e x i s t . The e x t r i n s i c p e r s p e c t i v e i d e n t i f i e s f a c t o r s which emphasize the p r o v i s i o n of s u p p o r t i v e environments (Gardner, 1964, 1978, 1981; C l a r k and Corcoran, 1985; F u r n i s s , 1981; L i n d q u i s t , 1978; Main, 1985) and o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r growth (Kanter, 1977, 1979; Schurr, 1980; Baldwin and Blackburn, 1981; Bess, 1982). As such, t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e seeks t o ensure the o r g a n i z a t i o n p r o v i d e s an environment and o p p o r t u n i t i e s which d i r e c t l y o r i n d i r e c t l y encourage i n d i v i d u a l s t o reach out, change, grow o r adapt. I t encourages c r e a t i v i t y , i n n o v a t i o n and r i s k t a k i n g through o r g a n i z a t i o n a l f l e x i b i l i t y as opposed t o s t i f l i n g i n d i v i d u a l s through r i g i d i t y and s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n . F a c t o r s developed from the i n t r i n s i c p e r s p e c t i v e focus on such s t r a t e g i e s as f u l f i l l m e n t of needs (Schneider and Zalesny, 1981), development of m o t i v a t i o n (Bess, 1977; Gardner, 1981), and changes i n a t t r i b u t i o n (Bumpus, 1981). T h i s p e r s p e c t i v e looks w i t h i n the i n d i v i d u a l as the focus f o r s t r a t e g y development and s e l e c t i o n . The developmental p e r s p e c t i v e s t r e s s e s a d u l t development and c a r e e r / l i f e stages (Baldwin, 1979) as w e l l as i n s t i t u t i o n a l and r o l e s p e c i f i c forms of f a c u l t y development (Centra, 1978a; G a f f , 1978; Baldwin and Blackburn, 1981; Konrad, 1985). These s t r a t e g i e s r e c o g n i z e people change over t h e i r c a r e e r s , consequently needing o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r growth and/or t h a t i n s t i t u t i o n s and i n d i v i d u a l s w i l l b e n e f i t from f a c u l t y development. The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e emphasizes approaches which are s t r u c t u r a l or p o l i c y focused. While drawing on the o t h e r p e r s p e c t i v e s d e s c r i b e d above, i t c l e a r l y r e c o g n i z e s an i n s t i t u t i o n ' s a d m i n i s t r a t i o n has the means t o i n f l u e n c e o r g a n i z a t i o n a l v i t a l i t y (Blackburn, 1979). S t r u c t u r a l change and f l e x i b i l i t y has been proposed as one s t r a t e g y (Group f o r Human Development, 1974; Bess, 1982). Other s t r a t e g i e s emphasized p e r s o n n e l - r e l a t e d p o l i c y i n i t i a t i v e s (Smith, 1978; C l a x t o n and M u r r e l l , 1984), i n c l u d i n g reward systems, (Brookes and German, 1978) i n f o r m a t i o n systems ( E w e l l , 1984), e x t r i n s i c m o t i v a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s ( P e l z and Andrews, 1976), and c a r e e r change, development and v a r i e t y o p t i o n s (Patton and Palmer, 1985; Boyer and Lewis, 1985; F u r n i s s , 1981). V i t a l i t y / P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r s Numerous works have been p u b l i s h e d s u g g e s t i n g f a c t o r s which a f f e c t f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y . While many i d e n t i f y s i n g l e elements or narrow groups o n l y a few r e p o r t on a broad, comprehensive b a s i s . Bevan (1985), f o r example, i d e n t i f i e s e l e v e n f a c t o r s which f a c i l i t a t e v i t a l i t y and e i g h t which i n h i b i t i t . I t i s Shuster (1985, p. 23-27), 14 however, who r e p o r t s a comprehensive range of broad f a c t o r s d e r i v e d from a survey of f a c u l t y . Using umbrella c a t e g o r i e s of t a n g i b l e s and i n t a n g i b l e s , he i d e n t i f i e d t o o l s of r e s e a r c h , means of i n t e l l e c t u a l refreshment, s t i m u l a t i o n of good s t u d e n t s , manageable work l o a d , and symbolism and s e c u r i t y of compensation as t a n g i b l e f a c t o r s which c r e a t e d f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y . I n t a n g i b l e f a c t o r s were encouragement by l e a d e r s h i p (support and d i r e c t i o n ) , sense of community ( p a r t i c i p a t i o n and f a i r / o p e n d e c i s i o n making), s a f e g u a r d i n g of i n t e l l e c t u a l freedom, and s t i m u l a t i o n of c o l l e a g u e s . C o n c l u s i o n T h i s study o r i g i n a t e s from an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p e r s p e c t i v e based on the premise t h a t community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n can i n f l u e n c e f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y . A major concern, from the p o s i t i o n of community c o l l e g e s , i s the emphasis i n the f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y l i t e r a t u r e on f o u r year i n s t i t u t i o n s . B land and Schmitz (1988) are r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the approach taken; as s t a t e d p r e v i o u s l y , they r e s t r i c t e d t h e i r r e s e a r c h t o u n i v e r s i t i e s , f o u r - y e a r c o l l e g e s and p r o f e s s i o n a l s c h o o l s . Lack of r e s e a r c h r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s as w e l l as the absence of s e n i o r or graduate students p r o v i d e s a d i s t i n c t l y d i f f e r e n t working environment and c o n t e x t f o r community c o l l e g e i n s t r u c t o r s . A t p r e s e n t i t appears re a s o n a b l e t o 15 q u e s t i o n the a p p l i c a t i o n o f these f i n d i n g s t o community c o l l e g e s . Determining f a c t o r s t h a t a f f e c t community c o l l e g e i n s t r u c t o r p r o d u c t i v i t y , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n a Canadian c o n t e x t , would p r o v i d e new knowledge f o r use by community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . 16 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY P o p u l a t i o n and Sample The t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n was c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y members a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e i n the w i n t e r 1989 semester who were t e a c h i n g f u l l -time a t t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c o l l e g e s i n September 1989. T h i s p o p u l a t i o n i n c l u d e d t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y w i t h some time r e l e a s e i n September f o r ot h e r d u t i e s but excluded those not t e a c h i n g a t a l l i n September even though they were c o n s i d e r e d t o be t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y members. The t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n was s t r a t i f i e d i n t o two su b p o p u l a t i o n s : the f a c u l t y a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and the f a c u l t y a t Red Deer C o l l e g e . A 100% sample o f the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n was surveyed, i . e . , a census. The sampling frames f o r F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e were t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e l i s t s o f c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y as p r o v i d e d by the c o l l e g e s ' p e r s o n n e l o f f i c e s i n February 1989. These l i s t s were a d j u s t e d i n September 1989 t o remove f a c u l t y no l o n g e r employed by the c o l l e g e s and f a c u l t y on e d u c a t i o n a l , s i c k o r p e r s o n a l l e a v e s . F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e was s e l e c t e d f o r t h i s study because the r e s e a r c h e r i s employed t h e r e i n an 17 a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a p a c i t y , has an i n t e r e s t i n f a c i l i t a t i n g f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y a t the c o l l e g e , and the p o p u l a t i o n was a c c e s s i b l e . However, because of the r e s e a r c h e r ' s employment a t the c o l l e g e , data c o l l e c t i o n and a n a l y s i s e r r o r s c o u l d r e s u l t from b i a s e s expressed by the f a c u l t y and/or the r e s e a r c h e r . A second c o l l e g e was d e s i r e d t o reduce the e f f e c t s of p o t e n t i a l b i a s ; Red Deer C o l l e g e was s e l e c t e d because the n e c e s s a r y i n f o r m a t i o n and support was a c c e s s i b l e . Research Design and Procedures T h i s r e s e a r c h was e x p l o r a t o r y and d e s c r i p t i v e , e x t e n d i n g f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y i n q u i r y i n t o the community c o l l e g e c o n t e x t through the use of a case study type of d e s i g n i n v o l v i n g two community c o l l e g e s . A c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l s urvey d e s i g n was used t o c o l l e c t data from a 100% sample, o r census, as d e s c r i b e d above. T h i s was done t o ensure a s u f f i c i e n t number of completed surveys would be r e t u r n e d . The p o s s i b l e s e n s i t i v i t y of f a c u l t y t o q u e s t i o n s r e l a t e d t o t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y was p e r c e i v e d as having a n e g a t i v e e f f e c t on the r e t u r n r a t e f o r t h i s survey. The f i r s t page of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n t a i n e d an overview of the contents of the survey, g e n e r a l i n s t r u c t i o n s , a c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y / a n o n y m i t y a f f i r m a t i o n and a d e f i n i t i o n of community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y 18 developed through a D e l p h i group p r o c e s s . The balance o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n s i s t e d o f t h r e e s e c t i o n s : P e r s o n a l P r o f i l e , P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r I d e n t i f i c a t i o n (broken down i n t o f a c i l i t a t i n g and h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s ) , and P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r Assessment. Open form q u e s t i o n s gathered data p e r t a i n i n g t o the respondents' p e r c e p t i o n o f f a c t o r s which f a c i l i t a t e d o r h i n d e r e d p r o d u c t i v i t y . C l o s e d form q u e s t i o n s were used f o r c o l l e c t i o n o f p e r s o n a l p r o f i l e data as w e l l as f o r p r o d u c t i v i t y f a c t o r assessment data. A p r e t e s t o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was a d m i n i s t e r e d t o 10 randomly s e l e c t e d f a c u l t y (5 from each c o l l e g e ) t o l o c a t e and c o r r e c t ambiguity as w e l l as oth e r weaknesses i n c o n s t r u c t i o n . P r e t e s t respondents were asked t o comment on any component of the survey which was u n c l e a r o r d i d not adequately a l l o w f o r responses. P e r s o n a l P r o f i l e T h i s s e c t i o n of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o l l e c t e d data i n o r d e r t o develop a p r o f i l e o f survey respondents. The survey i n s t r u c t i o n s asked respondents t o check the a p p r o p r i a t e response f o r each q u e s t i o n i n t h i s s e c t i o n . Questions asked i n c l u d e d : 1. sex (male o r female) 2. age a t l a s t b i r t h d a y ( i n 5 y e a r ranges s t a r t i n g w i t h under 26) 3. c u r r e n t main t e a c h i n g area ( c a r e e r / v o c a t i o n a l / t r a d e s ; u n i v e r s i t y t r a n s f e r / a c a d e m i c ; c o l l e g e preparatory/developmental) 4. c u r r e n t c o l l e g e p o s i t i o n (temporary c o n t r a c t ; p a r t - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t ; f u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t w i t h no time r e l e a s e f o r o t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ; f u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t w i t h some time r e l e a s e f o r o t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ; f u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t w i t h f u l l time r e l e a s e f o r o t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s ) 5. l e n g t h of employment a t t h i s c o l l e g e as an i n s t r u c t o r ( i n 5 y e a r ranges s t a r t i n g w i t h l e s s than 6 y e a r s ) . I d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the respondent's c o l l e g e was determined from each q u e s t i o n n a i r e : F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e was typed on q u e s t i o n n a i r e s sent t o F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e f a c u l t y and Red Deer C o l l e g e on those sent t o Red Deer C o l l e g e f a c u l t y . The sex of respondents was used t o compare the sex d i s t r i b u t i o n of respondents t o t h a t of the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n on the sampling frame. The c u r r e n t c o l l e g e p o s i t i o n q u e s t i o n was asked t o e l i m i n a t e respondents who appeared on the sampling frame but d i d not meet the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n c r i t e r i a . While the balance of the p r o f i l e q u e s t i o n s were 20 not a b s o l u t e l y n ecessary f o r the study they were asked i n o r d e r t o p r o v i d e a f u l l e r d e s c r i p t i o n of the respondents. P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r I d e n t i f i c a t i o n The q u e s t i o n s p r o b i n g f o r f a c t o r s which a f f e c t e d p r o d u c t i v i t y were asked u s i n g a c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t approach (the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t method i s d i s c u s s e d s e p a r a t e l y below) . The purpose of t h i s s e c t i o n was t o o b t a i n a number of i n c i d e n t s which respondents f e l t were p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n f a c i l i t a t i n g o r h i n d e r i n g t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . D e f i n i t i o n s o f i n c i d e n t and p e r s o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e were p r o v i d e d (these d e f i n i t i o n s are a l s o d i s c u s s e d below). Respondents were asked t o t h i n k back t o the l a s t time a p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n c i d e n t o c c u r r e d a t the c o l l e g e which f a c i l i t a t e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . They were subsequently asked t o d e s c r i b e t h i s i n c i d e n t and then t o i n d i c a t e how the i n c i d e n t f a c i l i t a t e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . T h i s was f o l l o w e d by a request t o t h i n k o f another p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n c i d e n t a t the c o l l e g e which f a c i l i t a t e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y , t o d e s c r i b e i t , and t o i n d i c a t e how i t f a c i l i t a t e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . The q u e s t i o n s r e l a t i n g t o h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s f o l l o w e d the format o f those a s k i n g about f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s . Respondents were asked t o t h i n k back t o the l a s t time a p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n c i d e n t o c c u r r e d a t the c o l l e g e 21 which h i n d e r e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . They were subsequently asked t o d e s c r i b e t h i s i n c i d e n t and then t o i n d i c a t e how the i n c i d e n t h i n d e r e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . T h i s was f o l l o w e d by a r e q u e s t t o t h i n k of another p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n c i d e n t a t the c o l l e g e which hindered t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y , t o d e s c r i b e i t , and t o i n d i c a t e how i t h i n d e r e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . C r i t i c a l I n c i d e n t Method The c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t technique c o l l e c t s data based on a c t u a l behaviours o r i n c i d e n t s from those who d i r e c t l y observed o r were a f f e c t e d by a s i g n i f i c a n t o c c u r r e n c e . The t e c h n i q u e was developed by Flanagan and h i s c o l l e a g u e s d u r i n g and a f t e r World War I I as an outgrowth of r e s e a r c h i n t o a i r c r e w s e l e c t i o n and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n the A v i a t i o n Psychology Program of the U n i t e d S t a t e s Army A i r Forces (Flanagan, 1954, p. 328). There are f i v e steps d e s c r i b e d by Flanagan (1954, pp. 337-346) f o r c a r r y i n g out the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t t e c h n i q u e . F i r s t , a statement of the g e n e r a l aim of the a c t i v i t y t o be s t u d i e d needs t o be developed. T h i s "should be a b r i e f statement o b t a i n e d from the a u t h o r i t i e s i n the f i e l d which expresses i n simple terms those o b j e c t i v e s t o which most people would agree." Second, the p l a n s and s p e c i f i c a t i o n s f o r c o l l e c t i o n of data need t o be determined, i n c l u d i n g the s i t u a t i o n s t o be observed ( p l a c e , persons, c o n d i t i o n s , and a c t i v i t i e s ) , r e l e v a n c e t o the g e n e r a l aim ( d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t , long-term o r short-term i n c i d e n t s ) , and the e f f e c t s of r e p o r t e d i n c i d e n t s on the g e n e r a l aim ( p o s i t i v e and n e g a t i v e e f f e c t s and t h e i r importance). T h i r d , the c o l l e c t i o n of data needs t o be c a r r i e d out w i t h c o n s i d e r a t i o n g i v e n t o when data i s c o l l e c t e d (by o b s e r v a t i o n o r r e c a l l ) , how i t i s c o l l e c t e d ( i n t e r v i e w s , q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , o r r e c o r d forms), and sample s i z e . F o u r t h , d a t a a n a l y s i s needs t o be conducted w i t h emphasis on the frame o f r e f e r e n c e t o be used (based on the p r o b a b l e use of the r e s u l t s ) , f o r m u l a t i o n of i n c i d e n t c a t e g o r i e s and l e v e l o f g e n e r a l i t y - s p e c i f i c i t y t o be used. F i f t h , the r e s u l t s of the study need t o be i n t e r p r e t e d and r e p o r t e d . The c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t method's primary disadvantage, from a q u a n t i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h p e r s p e c t i v e , l i e s i n i t s q u a l i t a t i v e approach. Of p a r t i c u l a r concern are the comprehensiveness of data c o l l e c t e d , r e l i a b i l i t y o f c o l l e c t i n g procedures, and c a t e g o r i z a t i o n of i n c i d e n t s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , Andersson and N i l s s o n (1964) concluded from t h e i r study, which was designed t o i n v e s t i g a t e these concerns, t h a t the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t method was both r e l i a b l e and v a l i d . These i s s u e s w i l l be addressed i n more d e t a i l i n the d i s c u s s i o n of r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y i s s u e s . The c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t method's advantages l i e i n i t s s u i t a b i l i t y f o r d e s c r i p t i v e and e x p l o r a t o r y r e s e a r c h and i n 23 i t s a d a p t a b i l i t y t o s p e c i f i c r e s e a r c h c o n d i t i o n s . While o r i g i n a l l y a p p l i e d i n m i l i t a r y c o n t e x t s and from t h e r e t o p e r s o n n e l r e l a t e d i n d u s t r y a p p l i c a t i o n s , the method i s now supported f o r r e s e a r c h i n c o u n s e l l i n g (Woolsey, 1986, p. 251). Flanagan (1954, p. 335) emphasized the c r i t i c a l -i n c i d e n t technique should not be viewed as a r i g i d methodology but r a t h e r be c o n s i d e r e d a " f l e x i b l e s e t o f p r i n c i p l e s which must be m o d i f i e d and adapted t o meet the s i t u a t i o n a t hand." T h i s f l e x i b i l i t y thus allowed the use o f q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t o c o l l e c t data i n s t e a d of the more u s u a l i n t e r v i e w approach although, a c c o r d i n g t o Andersson and N i l s s o n (1964), t h i s may have r e s u l t e d i n fewer i n c i d e n t s b e i n g c o l l e c t e d than i f i n t e r v i e w s were conducted. As a l r e a d y d e s c r i b e d above, respondents were re q u e s t e d t o r e c a l l p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n c i d e n t s which f a c i l i t a t e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . S i m i l a r l y , they were asked f o r p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n c i d e n t s which h i n d e r e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . An i n c i d e n t was d e f i n e d i n t h i s study as any o c c u r r e n c e , event o r happening at a p o i n t i n time, r e c u r r e n t l y over time, or c o n t i n u o u s l y over a p e r i o d of time (Cochran, 1985, p. 42). T h i s d e f i n i t i o n was s e l e c t e d because i t was a b l e t o i n c l u d e the broad range of i n c i d e n t s which were expected t o be r e p o r t e d and t o reduce the l i k e l i h o o d of i n c i d e n t s b e i n g r e s t r i c t e d t o those which o c c u r r e d a t a p o i n t i n time. Examples were p r o v i d e d t o respondents t o c l a r i f y the p o i n t , r e c u r r e n t and continuous time frames. R e c e i v i n g r e c o g n i t i o n o r be i n g unable t o o b t a i n a r e q u i r e d p u b l i c a t i o n a t the c o l l e g e l i b r a r y were examples of i n c i d e n t s a t a p o i n t i n time. Crowded cl a s s r o o m space i n a course taught o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n on a c o l l e g e committee were examples of r e c u r r e n t i n c i d e n t s . A s a b b a t i c a l o r secondment were p r o v i d e d as examples of i n c i d e n t s continuous i n nature. For an i n c i d e n t t o be c o n s i d e r e d c r i t i c a l i t must have made "a ' s i g n i f i c a n t ' c o n t r i b u t i o n , e i t h e r p o s i t i v e l y o r n e g a t i v e l y , t o the g e n e r a l aim of the a c t i v i t y " (Flanagan, 1954, p. 338). In the con t e x t of t h i s r e s e a r c h an i n c i d e n t was c o n s i d e r e d c r i t i c a l i f i t was p e r c e i v e d by the i n s t r u c t o r a f f e c t e d t o have had a not a b l e e f f e c t i n e i t h e r f a c i l i t a t i n g o r h i n d e r i n g h i s / h e r p r o d u c t i v i t y (the g e n e r a l aim) f o r any p e r i o d o f time. D e l p h i Process In o r d e r t o p r o v i d e a standard frame of r e f e r e n c e , o r g e n e r a l aim as i n the d i s c u s s i o n o f the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t method above, respondents were g i v e n a statement which d e f i n e d p r o d u c t i v i t y i n the form of outcomes expected o f a p r o d u c t i v e f a c u l t y member. These measures were developed by a team of 12 r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of the c o l l e g e s (6 from each c o l l e g e ) a c t i n g as a panel i n a D e l p h i p r o c e s s . 25 The D e l p h i method i s a procedure o r i g i n a l l y developed t o o b t a i n consensus of o p i n i o n from a group of ex p e r t s about a proposed a c t i o n . I t s name comes from a 1950's U.S. A i r Force sponsored Rand C o r p o r a t i o n study c a l l e d " P r o j e c t D e l p h i " which i n v o l v e d development of a m i l i t a r y atomic s t r a t e g y ( L i n s t o n e and T u r o f f , 1975, p. 10). R e l a t i n g t o A p o l l o ' s o r a c l e a t D e l p h i i n Greek h i s t o r y , the P r o j e c t D e l p h i group t r i e d t o look i n t o the f u t u r e t o determine what a c t i o n t o take. I n i t i a l l y used p r i m a r i l y f o r t e c h n o l o g i c a l f o r e c a s t i n g , the D e l p h i method has spread t o such d i v e r s e areas as c o n s e r v a t i o n , e d u c a t i o n , energy developments, l a n d use, marketing, r e c r e a t i o n , s o c i a l p l a n n i n g and t o u r i s m ( B a r d e c k i , 1984, p. 54). Besides f o r e c a s t i n g , the technique i s now a l s o used f o r o t h e r purposes where s u b j e c t i v e c o l l e c t i v e judgements are d e s i r e d . One study found 83% of the 441 d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n s employing the D e l p h i t e chnique d u r i n g the 1980-1984 p e r i o d used i t i n a normative way, s t u d y i n g p r e f e r e n c e s and p e r c e p t i o n s as opposed t o f o r e c a s t i n g and m i s c e l l a n e o u s r e s e a r c h (Rieger, 1986, p. 198) . The D e l p h i method uses i t e r a t i v e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t o c o l l e c t i n d i v i d u a l o p i n i o n s from group members who never meet f a c e t o f a c e . A f t e r each q u e s t i o n n a i r e 'round' group members are g i v e n feedback through a summary of the round's r e s u l t s . In the subsequent rounds th e y are asked t o r e - e v a l u a t e t h e i r answers based on the feedback r e c e i v e d . J u s t i f i c a t i o n s f o r p o s i t i o n s may be r e q u e s t e d as p a r t of the p r o c e s s . The D e l p h i u s u a l l y ends a f t e r f o u r rounds. The s t r o n g e s t c r i t i c i s m a g a i n s t the D e l p h i was p u b l i s h e d by Sackman (1975) who, i r o n i c a l l y , was w i t h The Rand C o r p o r a t i o n where the D e l p h i technique o r i g i n a t e d . Sackman q u e s t i o n e d the s c i e n t i f i c standards employed by the D e l p h i technique as w e l l as the a p p l i c a t i o n o f the t e c h n i q u e i t s e l f . He formulated 16 c o n c l u s i o n s about use of the D e l p h i i n c l u d i n g the v u l n e r a b i l i t y of the concept of "expert," f o r c e d consensus based on group s u g g e s t i o n and f r e q u e n t crude q u e s t i o n n a i r e d e s i g n (Sackman, 1975, pp. 73-74). Goldschmidt (1975) r e f u t e d the c r i t i c i s m s by c h a r g i n g Sackman used a j o u r n a l i s t i c r a t h e r than s c i e n t i f i c approach i n e v a l u a t i n g the D e l p h i technique, e s s e n t i a l l y h a ving done what Sackman h i m s e l f had p r e v i o u s l y accused D e l p h i p r a c t i t i o n e r s of doing. Goldschmidt goes on t o c i t e examples where Sackman quoted out of c o n t e x t , i n f e r r e d i n a p p r o p r i a t e l y and c i t e d f i n d i n g s i n c o r r e c t l y . In s p i t e o f Goldschmidt's support of the D e l p h i , R i e g e r (1986, p. 201) concluded d i s s e r t a t i o n s u s i n g the D e l p h i technique o f t e n e x h i b i t e d unnecessary weakness. But as B a r d e c k i (1984, p. 57) i n d i c a t e s , poor d e s i g n and a n a l y s i s i s p r o b a b l y not r e s t r i c t e d i n s o c i a l r e s e a r c h t o the D e l p h i t e c h n i q u e . 27 The D e l p h i method has the advantage t h a t i n d i v i d u a l members cannot dominate or i n f l u e n c e the group as the y can i n f a c e t o f a c e meetings. Compared t o n o n i t e r a t i v e s u r v e y s , D e l p h i groups a l s o b e n e f i t from feedback of r e s u l t s t o p a r t i c i p a n t s and the o p p o r t u n i t y t o e x p l o r e d i s s e n t i n g o p i n i o n . Because some users o f the D e l p h i technique f a i l e d t o conduct t h e i r r e s e a r c h w i t h s u f f i c i e n t r i g o r s h o u l d not p r e c l u d e i t s use by o t h e r s . L i n s t o n e and T u r o f f (1975, p. 4) i d e n t i f y s e v e r a l c o n d i t i o n s which i n d i v i d u a l l y o r c o l l e c t i v e l y suggest the need t o use the D e l p h i p r o c e s s . Among those r e l e v a n t t o the development of a d e f i n i t i o n of f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y f o r t h i s study a r e : 1. "the problem does not l e n d i t s e l f t o p r e c i s e a n a l y t i c a l t e chniques but can b e n e f i t from s u b j e c t i v e judgements on a c o l l e c t i v e b a s i s , " 2. "time and c o s t make frequent group meetings i n f e a s i b l e , " 3. "disagreements among i n d i v i d u a l s a re so severe o r p o l i t i c a l l y u n p a l a t a b l e t h a t the communication process must be r e f e r e e d and/or anonymity assured," and 4. "the h e t e r o g e n e i t y of the p a r t i c i p a n t s must be p r e s e r v e d t o assure v a l i d i t y of the r e s u l t s . " D e f i n i n g any term, l e t alone f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y , i s not a pro c e s s which lends i t s e l f t o p r e c i s e a n a l y t i c a l t e c h n i q u e s and can d e f i n i t e l y b e n e f i t from c o l l e c t i v e 28 judgements. Given t h a t t h i s study i n v o l v e d two c o l l e g e s hundreds of m i l e s a p a r t , group meetings were out o f the q u e s t i o n . While "3" above o v e r s t a t e s the c o n d i t i o n r e l a t i v e t o t h i s study, t h e r e i s , n e v e r t h e l e s s , s e n s i t i v i t y by f a c u l t y t o the q u e s t i o n of t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . Any attempt a t d e f i n i n g i t needed t o be c a r r i e d out t a c t f u l l y . F i n a l l y , the i s s u e of f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y needed t o be viewed from two key p e r s p e c t i v e s , t h a t of f a c u l t y themselves and t h a t of the c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Any attempt t o d e f i n e the term needed t o m a i n t a i n a balance between the views of f a c u l t y and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . Delbecq, Van de Ven and Gustafson (1975, pp. 87-89) developed g u i d e l i n e s f o r the s e l e c t i o n of the D e l p h i group o r p a n e l . They suggested respondents ( p a n e l i s t s ) "should f e e l p e r s o n a l l y i n v o l v e d i n the problem of concern," "have p e r t i n e n t i n f o r m a t i o n t o share," "are m o t i v a t e d t o i n c l u d e the D e l p h i t a s k i n t h e i r schedule of competing t a s k s , " and t h a t the process " w i l l i n c l u d e i n f o r m a t i o n they v a l u e and t o which they would not otherwise have acc e s s . " Furthermore, th e y suggested a nomination process should be used t o s e l e c t the p a n e l i s t s . I f a panel of experts i s d e s i r e d they suggested s e e k i n g nominations of well-known and r e s p e c t e d i n d i v i d u a l s from the group p o s s e s s i n g r e l e v a n t i n f o r m a t i o n and e x p e r i e n c e . A random sample of t h i s group c o u l d be taken i f a more r e p r e s e n t a t i v e view i s d e s i r e d . 29 The s u b j e c t of experts i s a c o n t e n t i o u s one. Not o n l y i s i t d i f f i c u l t t o d e f i n e an e x p e r t , t h e r e i s a l s o disagreement about the a b i l i t y o f e x p erts t o e x e r c i s e s u p e r i o r judgement r e l a t i v e t o t h a t of nonexperts ( D i e t z , 1987; Goldschmidt, 1975; L i n s t o n e , 1975; Sackman, 1975). D i e t z (1987, p. 80) concludes "Delphi panels are u s u a l l y a convenience sample of knowledgeable persons r a t h e r than a random sample of e x p e r t s . " For t h i s study i t was necessary t o r e p r e s e n t the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and f a c u l t y a t both F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e on the p a n e l . F a c u l t y and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s would be more l i k e l y t o accept a d e f i n i t i o n of f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y and the r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s i f each group was adequately r e p r e s e n t e d i n the development of the d e f i n i t i o n . O b v i o u s l y , the a c c e p t a b i l i t y of the d e f i n i t i o n and r e s e a r c h r e s u l t s would be h i g h e r f o r the c o l l e g e s i f each c o l l e g e was r e p r e s e n t e d on the D e l p h i p a n e l . The procedure used t o o b t a i n a p a n e l of f a c u l t y and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s was a combination of nominations and random s e l e c t i o n . The p r e s i d e n t s of both c o l l e g e s were i n v i t e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e based on t h e i r p o s i t i o n i n t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n s . They were, i n a sense, nominated as a r e s u l t of the p o s i t i o n h e l d . The p r e s i d e n t s of the f a c u l t y a s s o c i a t i o n s a t both c o l l e g e s were a l s o i n v i t e d t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n the panel f o r the same reason. The two c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s and two f a c u l t y a s s o c i a t i o n p r e s i d e n t s 30 were asked t o each nominate t h r e e c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and t h r e e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t f a c u l t y t h a t they f e l t had the e x p e r t i s e and w i l l i n g n e s s t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n a D e l p h i group t o develop a d e f i n i t i o n of community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y . I f they d e c l i n e d without nominating f a c u l t y and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s they were asked t o pass the r e q u e s t t o another f a c u l t y member ( i n the case o f the f a c u l t y a s s o c i a t i o n p r e s i d e n t s ) and t o another a d m i n i s t r a t o r ( i n the case o f c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s ) . The remaining pan e l p o s i t i o n s were f i l l e d by use of the procedure below. Any f a c u l t y members and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s nominated by both a c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t and a f a c u l t y a s s o c i a t i o n p r e s i d e n t (or a d e l e g a t e as d e s c r i b e d above) were requ e s t e d t o j o i n the D e l p h i p a n e l . The remaining p o s i t i o n s on t h e 12 member pa n e l were f i l l e d by random s e l e c t i o n by c o l l e g e and r o l e ( f a c u l t y o r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ) from the l i s t o f nominees. F o r anyone t h a t d e c l i n e d a request t o j o i n the D e l p h i p a n e l the p o s i t i o n on the panel was f i l l e d by going t o the next randomly s e l e c t e d nominee. Three a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and t h r e e f a c u l t y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s were s e l e c t e d from each c o l l e g e i n v o l v e d i n the survey u s i n g the above procedure. They were asked t o answer the f o l l o w i n g q u e s t i o n : How would you d e f i n e a p r o d u c t i v e community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y member? Please answer t h i s q u e s t i o n by completin g the statement below i n p o i n t form w i t h p r o d u c t i v i t y measures you f e e l are important. A p r o d u c t i v e community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y member i s one who: 31 A s e r i e s of c y c l e s p r o v i d i n g feedback about a composite o f the group's responses and subsequent o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o modify and r a t e the f a c t o r s i n these i n t e r i m composite d e f i n i t i o n s e v e n t u a l l y r e s u l t e d i n the d e f i n i t i o n o f p r o d u c t i v i t y used i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r Assessment The q u e s t i o n n a i r e a l s o asked respondents t o e v a l u a t e a l i s t o f v i t a l i t y a s s o c i a t e d work r e l a t e d f a c t o r s as r e p o r t e d by S c h u s t e r (1985, p. 23-27) and others i n o r d e r t o assess the p e r c e i v e d e f f e c t of these f a c t o r s on f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y . A f i v e p o i n t b i p o l a r i n t e r v a l r a t i n g s c a l e was used t o measure f a c u l t y p e r c e p t i o n of the p r i o r i t y each f a c t o r had i n i t s e f f e c t on t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . The v i t a l i t y r e l a t e d work f a c t o r s summarized i n Tab l e 1 formed the b a s i s f o r d e v e l o p i n g the survey q u e s t i o n s . TABLE 1: VITALITY FACTORS FROM THE LITERATURE Baldwin (1983) opportunities to teach different courses opportunities to teach new courses opportunities for temporary nonacademic assignments Baldwin and Blackburn (1981); Bevan (1985) a college environment that is flexible an informal work environment Baldwin and Blackburn (1981); Kanter (1977) opportunities for career growth opportunities for career advancement Boberg and Blackburn (1983) a work environment which supports quality Boberg and Blackburn (1983); Corcoran and Clark (1983) stimulating work satisfying work fulfilling work Boyer and Lewis (1985) opportunities for outside professional consulting Gaff (1978) faculty development opportunities instructional development opportunities Schuster (1985) library holdings laboratory space and contemporary laboratory equipment professional meetings sabbatical leaves stimulation of good students manageable work load adequate compensation recognition appreciation clear institutional objectives and priorities meaningful faculty participation in governance openness and fairness in decision making intellectual freedom stimulation of colleagues Sorcinelli (1986) opportunities to learn new things opportunities to take on new challenges opportunities to take on new responsibilities 33 CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS D e l p h i Process A l l 12 p a n e l i s t s responded t o round one, c o n t r i b u t i n g a t o t a l o f 118 measures of p r o d u c t i v i t y (an average o f s l i g h t l y under 10 f a c t o r s per p a n e l i s t ) . The 118 measures were then c l a s s i f i e d i n t o 10 c a t e g o r i e s . In round two p a n e l i s t s were each p r o v i d e d w i t h the measures they i d e n t i f i e d i n round one and asked t o a s s i g n one o f the 10 c a t e g o r i e s o r an 11th (other - none of the above accommodate t h i s p r o d u c t i v i t y measure) t o each of the measures t h e y had r e p o r t e d . Although a l l p a n e l i s t s a g a i n responded, one f a i l e d t o r e t u r n p a r t of the two page response form w i t h the r e s u l t t h a t s i x of the measures were not c a t e g o r i z e d by p a n e l i s t s i n t h i s round. C a t e g o r i z a t i o n o f measures by p a n e l i s t s showed 71.7% of t h e i r c a t e g o r i e s matched those a s s i g n e d by the r e s e a r c h e r . S i x of the 118 measures r e c e i v e d the "other" c a t e g o r y r e s u l t i n g i n the c a t e g o r y scheme accommodating 94.7% of the r e p o r t e d measures. In t h i s round they were a l s o asked t o r a t e each o f the 10 c a t e g o r i e s on a f i v e p o i n t r a t i n g s c a l e w i t h one s i g n i f y i n g low importance of the statement t o them and f i v e h i g h importance. 34 In round t h r e e p a n e l i s t s were g i v e n feedback about round two r e s u l t s f o r each category. The group's average r a t i n g , lowest and h i g h e s t responses, s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n and t h e i r own r a t i n g were p r o v i d e d . They were asked t o r e r a t e each c a t e g o r y u s i n g the same f i v e p o i n t s c a l e . I f t h e i r new response f o r a c a t e g o r y was more than one u n i t from the average shown f o r i t i n round two, p a n e l i s t s were asked t o e x p l a i n why they c o n s i d e r e d the statement's importance t o be h i g h e r o r lower than the average response. P a n e l i s t s were a l s o g i v e n the s i x measures not c l a s s i f i e d by them i n round two and f o r each were asked t o : (a) a s s i g n a c a t e g o r y t o i t i f t h e y f e l t an e x i s t i n g c a t e g o r y d i d accommodate the measure, o r (b) i n d i c a t e t h a t the measure was important enough t o be added as a separate category, o r (c) i n d i c a t e t h a t the measure was not important enough and sh o u l d be d e l e t e d . A l l p a n e l i s t s responded i n round t h r e e . Round t h r e e r e s u l t s f o r these s i x measures showed a t l e a s t two-t h i r d s o f the respondents f e l t the measures were e i t h e r a l r e a d y covered by an e x i s t i n g c a t e g o r y o r s h o u l d be d e l e t e d . With such low support the measures were not c o n s i d e r e d i n round f o u r . In round f o u r p a n e l i s t s were g i v e n feedback about round t h r e e r e s u l t s f o r each category. The group's average r a t i n g , lowest and h i g h e s t responses, s t a n d a r d d e v i a t i o n , t h e i r own r a t i n g and respondent comments which accompanied round t h r e e r e p l i e s were p r o v i d e d . They were asked t o 35 TABLE 2: COMPARISON OF RESPONSES TO ROUNDS TWO AND FOUR Category Round Mean SD 2 4 2 4 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 4.42 4.55 4.25 4.08 4.75 4.58 4.25 4.50 4.25 3.17 4.50 3.92 4.17 4.08 5.00 4.67 4.17 4.58 4.17 3.17 .95 .66 .72 .76 .43 .64 .60 .50 .60 1.07 .76 1.19 .80 .64 .00 .62 .55 .49 .55 1.07 r e r a t e each c a t e g o r y u s i n g the same f i v e p o i n t s c a l e and t o use the round t h r e e feedback t o h e l p them r e - e v a l u a t e t h e i r own responses and t o more f u l l y understand how o p i n i o n s o f the o t h e r p a r t i c i p a n t s were formed. A 100% response r a t e was a g a i n o b t a i n e d . A comparison of the p a n e l i s t s ' round two r a t i n g s o f the c a t e g o r i e s and t h e i r f i n a l r a t i n g s i n round f o u r a re p r o v i d e d i n Table 2. The e i g h t c a t e g o r i e s f i n a l l y used i n the d e f i n i t i o n o f community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y are r e p o r t e d i n Tab l e 3 on the next page. P e r s o n a l p r o f i l e data was c o l l e c t e d i n o r d e r t o d e s c r i b e the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f respondents by c o l l e g e , sex, age, c u r r e n t main t e a c h i n g area, c u r r e n t c o l l e g e p o s i t i o n , and l e n g t h o f time f a c u l t y had been i n s t r u c t o r s a t t h e i r P r o f i l e o f Respondents 36 TABLE 3: COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY PRODUCTIVITY DEFINITION A p r o d u c t i v e community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y member i s one who: 1. i s an e f f e c t i v e i n s t r u c t o r , and i s a c t i v e l y committed t o remaining e f f e c t i v e 2. i s student c e n t r e d , s t i m u l a t i n g and h e l p i n g them t o l e a r n and l e a r n how t o l e a r n 3. p a r t i c i p a t e s i n p r o f e s s i o n a l development and renewal a c t i v i t i e s 4. c a r r i e s the expected l o a d of i n s t r u c t i o n a l and n o n i n s t r u c t i o n a l t a s k s 5. updates and r e v i s e s courses r e g u l a r l y 6. p a r t i c i p a t e s i n the c o l l e g e beyond h i s / h e r s p e c i f i c t e a c h i n g r o l e 7. uses r e s o u r c e s e f f i c i e n t l y 8. c o n t r i b u t e s t o a c h i e v i n g the c o l l e g e ' s m i s s i o n and goals r e s p e c t i v e c o l l e g e s . C o l l e g e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n was determined by showing the c o l l e g e name on each survey, i . e . , F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e on surveys sent t o F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e f a c u l t y and Red Deer C o l l e g e on surveys sent t o Red Deer C o l l e g e f a c u l t y . The l i s t s o f c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y p r o v i d e d through the per s o n n e l departments a t both c o l l e g e s i d e n t i f i e d 95 f a c u l t y a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and 152 a t Red Deer C o l l e g e . The survey of f a c u l t y , however, excluded t h r e e f a c u l t y from each c o l l e g e who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the 37 D e l p h i p r o j e c t f o r t h i s study and f i v e from each c o l l e g e who r e c e i v e d a p i l o t survey. Each l i s t was a l s o c o r r e c t e d , based on i n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d through the c o l l e g e s ' personnel o f f i c e s , t o exclude those who had r e t i r e d , r e s i g n e d , o r were on l e a v e . The f i n a l t o t a l s o f f a c u l t y surveyed, r e f l e c t e d i n Tab l e 4, were 76 a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and 133 a t Red Deer C o l l e g e , f o r a t o t a l o f 209. TABLE 4: SAMPLING FRAME ADJUSTMENTS FVC RDC TOTAL F a c u l t y on l i s t s p r o v i d e d by P e r s o n n e l O f f i c e s 95 152 247 Less Adjustments: D e l p h i group 3 3 6 P i l o t survey 5 5 10 L e a v e / r e t i r e d / r e s i g n e d 11 11 22 T o t a l Surveyed 76 133 209 The q u e s t i o n r e l a t i n g t o c o l l e g e p o s i t i o n o f an i n s t r u c t o r had the d u a l purpose of a c t i n g as a s c r e e n i n g q u e s t i o n (where a l l those responding as s e s s i o n a l s o r as hav i n g f u l l - t i m e r e l e a s e from t e a c h i n g were not i n c l u d e d i n the analyses because they f e l l o u t s i d e the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n ) and as a method of c o l l e c t i n g data t o d e s c r i b e the d i s t r i b u t i o n i n the sample between f u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g i n s t r u c t o r s w i t h r e l e a s e time f o r o t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and those who t e a c h o n l y and have no r e l e a s e time. 38 The t o t a l number of responses r e c e i v e d was 107 w i t h 51 o f these coming from F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and 56 from Red Deer C o l l e g e . There were s i x unusable q u e s t i o n n a i r e s because these respondents d i d not meet the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n c r i t e r i a . T h i s l e f t 47 useable q u e s t i o n n a i r e s from F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and 54 from Red Deer C o l l e g e f o r a t o t a l of 101 u s e a b l e r e t u r n e d q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . P a r t I I I ( P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r Assessment) i n one of the useable q u e s t i o n n a i r e s was misunderstood by the respondent r e s u l t i n g i n o n l y 100 u s e a b l e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s f o r P a r t I I I . The 107 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s r e t u r n e d r e p r e s e n t s a r e t u r n r a t e of 51.2% when compared t o the t o t a l of 209 sent t o f a c u l t y a t both c o l l e g e s . A f t e r d e d u c t i n g the s i x unusable responses r e p o r t e d above, the useable r e t u r n r a t e was 48. as shown i n Table 5 • TABLE 5: QUESTIONNAIRE RETURN RATE Number Number Useable Sent Returned % Returns % FVC 76 51 67.1% 47 61.8% RDC 133 56 42.1% 54 40.6% T o t a l s 209 107 51.2% 101 48.3% As shown i n Table 6 on the next page, t h e r e were 38 female and 62 male respondents t o the survey. One r e t u r n e d q u e s t i o n n a i r e d i d not show an answer t o the q u e s t i o n r e g a r d i n g sex of respondent. The sex of respondents and the sex of those i n the sampling frame ( a f t e r adjustments f o r 39 TABLE 6 : SEX OF RESPONDENTS FVC RDC % T o t a l % Female 17 36. .2% 21 38. 9% 38 37. 6% Male 30 63. .8% 32 59. 3% 62 61. 4% Unknown 0 0, .0% 1 1. 9% 1 1. 0% T o t a l 47 100, .0% 54 100. 1% 101 100. 0% D e l p h i group and p i l o t survey p a r t i c i p a t i o n and adjustments f o r l e a v e s , r e t i r e m e n t s and r e s i g n a t i o n s ) i s compared i n Ta b l e 7. As shown i n t h i s t a b l e , the sex p r o f i l e o f those r e t u r n i n g useable q u e s t i o n n a i r e s was s i m i l a r t o the sex p r o f i l e o f the t o t a l who were sent the surveys. TABLE 7: RESPONDENTS VERSUS ADJUSTED SAMPLING FRAME Sex FVC RDC TOTAL Female Respondents Sampling Frame 36.2% 44.7% 38.9% 31.6% 37.6% 36.4% Male Respondents Sampling Frame 63.8% 55.3% 59.3% 61.7% 61.4% 59.3% Unknown Respondents Sampling Frame 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% 6.8% 1.0% 4.3% T o t a l Respondents Sampling Frame 100.0% 100.0% 100.1% 100.1% 100.0% 100.0% Det e r m i n a t i o n of the sex of f a c u l t y l i s t e d on the sampling frames i s , however, based on o p i n i o n and p r o v i d e d o n l y f o r rough comparison. The r e s e a r c h e r was acq u a i n t e d w i t h f a c u l t y on the F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e l i s t but not w i t h those 40 on the Red Deer l i s t . Consequently/ d e t e r m i n a t i o n o f sex o f Red Deer C o l l e g e f a c u l t y on the l i s t was based on i d e n t i f y i n g male and female names. While those names which commonly c o u l d be a t t r i b u t e d t o e i t h e r sex o r were f o r e i g n were i d e n t i f i e d as unknown, i t i s p o s s i b l e e r r o r s c o u l d have been made w i t h o t h e r s . Respondents were p r i m a r i l y i n the 36-50 yea r age range as i l l u s t r a t e d by Table 8. Approximately o n e - t h i r d (31.7%) TABLE 8: AGE OF RESPONDENTS FVC RDC TOTAL n Not answered 2.1% 0.0% 1.0% 1 26-30 0.0% 1.9% 1.0% 1 31-35 2.1% 13.0% 7.9% 8 36-40 23.4% 20.4% 21.8% 22 41-45 29.8% 33.3% 31.7% 32 46-50 27.7% 13.0% 19.8% 20 51-55 6.4% 13.0% 9.9% 10 56-60 6.4% 5.6% 5.9% 6 61-65 2.1% 0.0% 1.0% 1 T o t a l 100.0% 100.2% 100.0% 101 n 47 54 101 of respondents a t both F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e r e p o r t e d b e i n g i n the 41-45 age range. The next most f r e q u e n t age responses were the 36-40 and 46-50 age groups w i t h 21.8% and 19.8% r e s p e c t i v e l y . A n o t i c e a b l e d i f f e r e n c e between the c o l l e g e s w i t h r e s p e c t t o f a c u l t y age i s t h a t f a c u l t y were not as c o n c e n t r a t e d i n the 36-50 age range a t Red Deer C o l l e g e (66.7%) as they were a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e (80.9%). 41 Those surveyed were asked t o i d e n t i f y t h e i r c u r r e n t main t e a c h i n g area by s e l e c t i n g one o n l y of ' c a r e e r / v o c a t i o n a l / t r a d e s ' , ' u n i v e r s i t y t r a n s f e r / a c a d e m i c ' , o r ' c o l l e g e preparatory/developmental'. These areas were not i n t e n d e d t o p r o v i d e sharp demarcations of t e a c h i n g areas but were i n s t e a d s e l e c t e d t o g i v e a sense of d i s t r i b u t i o n o f f a c u l t y among these common community c o l l e g e program ar e a s . T a b l e 9 i l l u s t r a t e s the d i s t r i b u t i o n of responses. TABLE 9: CURRENT MAIN TEACHING AREA FVC RDC TOTAL n C a r e e r / v o c a t i o n a l / t r a d e s 38.3% 50.0% 44.6% 45 C o l l e g e p r e p a r a t o r y / developmental 17.0% 9.3% 12.9% 13 U n i v e r s i t y t r a n s f e r / academic 44.7% 40.7% 42.6% 43 T o t a l n 100.0% 47 100.0% 54 100.1% 101 101 The q u e s t i o n which asked respondents t o s e l e c t the statement which be s t d e s c r i b e d t h e i r c u r r e n t c o l l e g e p o s i t i o n was in t e n d e d t o p r o v i d e data about the d i s t r i b u t i o n between those who were f u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t i n s t r u c t o r s without time r e l e a s e f o r o t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and those who had some time r e l e a s e . The q u e s t i o n a l s o p r o v i d e d respondents the o p t i o n o f i n d i c a t i n g they were temporary c o n t r a c t , p a r t - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t , o r f u l l -time c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t i n s t r u c t o r s w i t h f u l l time r e l e a s e 42 f o r o t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . These l a t t e r o p t i o n s were in t e n d e d t o i d e n t i f y f a c u l t y who d i d not f i t the c r i t e r i a o f the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n . T a b l e 10 i l l u s t r a t e s the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f responses. S i x r e t u r n e d surveys were TABLE 10: CURRENT COLLEGE POSITION FVC RDC T o t a l Ses s i o n a l / t e m p o r a r y c o n t r a c t 0 0 0 P a r t - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t 2 0 2 F u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g w i t h no r e l e a s e time 22 34 56 F u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g w i t h some r e l e a s e time 25 20 45 F u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g w i t h f u l l r e l e a s e time 2 2 4 T o t a l 51 56 107 exc l u d e d from a n a l y s i s because respondents d i d not f i t the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n . Two of these i d e n t i f i e d themselves as p a r t - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t i n s t r u c t o r s and f o u r as f u l l -time c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t i n s t r u c t o r s w i t h f u l l time r e l e a s e f o r o t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . The remaining 101 respondents were c l o s e l y s p l i t between f u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t i n s t r u c t o r s w i t h no time r e l e a s e f o r o t h e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s (56) and some time r e l e a s e (45). There were no temporary c o n t r a c t i n s t r u c t o r s . At F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e t h e r e were more i n s t r u c t o r s who had some time r e l e a s e f o r o t h e r 43 r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s (25) than t h e r e were i n s t r u c t o r s w i t h no time r e l e a s e (22). A t Red Deer C o l l e g e the s i t u a t i o n was r e v e r s e d w i t h 34 i n s t r u c t o r s r e p o r t i n g no time r e l e a s e and 20 r e p o r t i n g some r e l e a s e . A l s o o f i n t e r e s t i n development of a respondent p r o f i l e i s t he l e n g t h of time f a c u l t y responding have been employed as i n s t r u c t o r s w i t h t h e i r c o l l e g e (see Table 11). A t the TABLE 11: LENGTH OF EMPLOYMENT WITH COLLEGE AS INSTRUCTORS FVC RDC T o t a l n Less than 6 years 14.9% 9.3% 11.9% 12 6 - 10 years 36.2% 51.9% 44.6% 45 1 1 - 1 5 years 48.9% 22.2% 34.7% 35 1 6 - 2 0 y e a r s 0.0% 13.0% 6.9% 7 2 1 - 2 5 years 0.0% 3.7% 2.0% 2 T o t a l 100.0% 100.1% 100.1% 101 n 47 54 101 time o f t h i s survey F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e was i n i t s 15th ye a r and Red Deer C o l l e g e i n i t s 26th. Almost 49% of F r a s e r V a l l e y i n s t r u c t o r s had been w i t h t h e i r c o l l e g e f o r 11-15 ye a r s w i t h approximately 36% f o r 6-10 y e a r s . Less than 15% had been w i t h the c o l l e g e f o r l e s s than 6 y e a r s . Most of Red Deer C o l l e g e ' s i n s t r u c t o r s had been w i t h t h e i r c o l l e g e f o r 6-10 y e a r s , r e p r e s e n t i n g approximately 52% of i n s t r u c t o r s . About 22% had been w i t h the c o l l e g e from 11-15 yea r s and 13% from 16-20 y e a r s . Less than 10% had been 44 i n s t r u c t o r s a t the c o l l e g e f o r l e s s than 6 y e a r s and l e s s than 4% f o r 21-25 y e a r s . F a c t o r s F a c i l i t a t i n g and H i n d e r i n g P r o d u c t i v i t y The p r o d u c t i v i t y f a c t o r s s e c t i o n o f the survey was s u b j e c t e d t o two a n a l y s e s . The f i r s t a n a l y s i s , c a t e g o r i z a t i o n of r e p o r t e d i n c i d e n t s , c o n s i s t e d o f two s t a g e s . Stage one was t o become t h o r o u g h l y a c q u a i n t e d w i t h answers t o the q u e s t i o n s which asked respondents t o d e s c r i b e f a c i l i t a t i n g and h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s , n o t i n g s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s i n i n c i d e n t s , i n o r d e r t o prepare f o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f these i n c i d e n t s . The survey asked f a c u l t y t o t h i n k back t o the l a s t time a p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n c i d e n t o c c u r r e d a t the c o l l e g e which f a c i l i t a t e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . In the next q u e s t i o n they were asked i f th e y c o u l d t h i n k o f another p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n c i d e n t which f a c i l i t a t e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . F a c u l t y were a l s o asked t o t h i n k back t o the l a s t time a p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n c i d e n t o c c u r r e d a t the c o l l e g e which h i n d e r e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . L i k e the f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t q u e s t i o n , t h i s was f o l l o w e d w i t h a request t o t h i n k of another i n c i d e n t which h i n d e r e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . The q u e s t i o n s a s k i n g how a r e p o r t e d i n c i d e n t f a c i l i t a t e d o r hindered p r o d u c t i v i t y were used t o more f u l l y understand the responses p r o v i d e d and t o h e l p determine i f the r e p o r t e d i n c i d e n t s were 45 p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t t o the respondents. In the 101 u s e a b l e r e t u r n e d q u e s t i o n n a i r e s respondents d e s c r i b e d a t o t a l of 171 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s and gave no response i n 31 c a s e s . They a l s o d e s c r i b e d a t o t a l of 159 h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s and gave no response i n 43 cases. Stage two of the f i r s t a n a l y s i s c o n s i s t e d of s o r t i n g r e l a t e d i n c i d e n t s i n t o t e n t a t i v e c a t e g o r i e s f o l l o w e d by s e v e r a l c y c l e s of r e v i e w i n g and m o d i f y i n g c a t e g o r i e s (and i n c i d e n t placement i n c a t e g o r i e s ) u n t i l c a t e g o r i z a t i o n was c o n s i d e r e d s a t i s f a c t o r y . T h i s process i n c l u d e d an a n a l y s i s of i n c i d e n t frequency among the c a t e g o r i e s t o assess the meaningfulness of the c a t e g o r y d e s i g n f o r the i n c i d e n t s r e p o r t e d . T h i s stage a l s o examined the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the c a t e g o r i e s t o see i f they i n t u r n c o u l d be grouped a t a more g e n e r a l l e v e l . T h i s c o n s i s t e d of a s e r i e s of c y c l e s i n which c a t e g o r i e s were grouped, reviewed and regrouped i n t o h i g h e r l e v e l major c a t e g o r i e s u n t i l a s a t i s f a c t o r y major l e v e l grouping was achieved. The 330 i n c i d e n t s (171 f a c i l i t a t i n g and 159 h i n d e r i n g ) c o l l e c t e d by the q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e s u l t e d i n 15 i n c i d e n t c a t e g o r i e s which i n t u r n were ab l e t o be grouped i n t o f o u r major areas each of which p r o v i d e s a theme f o r the r e l a t e d c a t e g o r i e s i t c o n t a i n s . Each of the c a t e g o r i e s i n a major are a r e f l e c t s the theme f o r the i n c i d e n t s from which i t was d e r i v e d . 46 The second a n a l y s i s of the r e s u l t s of the P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r s e c t i o n of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e i n v o l v e d a review and frequency assessment of the 4 major areas and 15 c a t e g o r i e s as summarized i n Table 12 and d e s c r i b e d below. Examples of f a c i l i t a t i n g and h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s are p r o v i d e d f o r each c a t e g o r y . For each i n c i d e n t c i t e d the q u o t a t i o n i n TABLE 12: FACILITATING AND HINDERING INCIDENT CATEGORIES Facilitating incidents are associated with the presence or positive effects of these factors. Hindering incidents are associated with their absence or negative effects. A. Interaction with Others 1. Support from Administration (e.g., support, assistance, encouragement, recognition, awards from admimstration/board/government) 2. Leadership by Administration (e.g., consultation, listening, communication, organizational structure, delegation, direction, decision making, management style, social interaction at work) 3. Colleagues (e.g., support, assistance, encouragement, recognition, social interaction at work) 4. Students (e.g., response, feedback, performance, behavior, achievement) B. Resources 5. Equipment (e.g., for classroom, office, laboratory - including computer related equipment) 6. Facilities (e.g., space, physical plant, maintenance) 7. Funding (e.g., budget, ministry funding) 8. Support Services (e.g., library collection and services, audio-visual collection and services, training aid availability, counselling/advising services, registration services) C. Processes and Policies 9. Personnel Issues (e.g., evaluations, evaluation processes, compensation, training availability, contract negotiations) 10. Professional Development (e.g., conferences, articulation, workshops, courses, sabbaticals, reading; opportunities, time, funding, support) 11. Scheduling Practices (e.g., classes, meetings, exams) D. Work Activities 12. Programming Issues (e.g., new courses and programs, unchanged courses and programs, educational innovations, revision of courses) 13. Secondary Duties (e.g., committees, meetings, peripheral tasks, special requests, administrative duties) 14. Workload (e.g., class sizes, number of sections, release time, staffing levels) 15. Work Roles (e.g., new, different, unchanged) 47 parentheses i s the c o r r e s p o n d i n g response t o the survey q u e s t i o n , "How d i d t h i s i n c i d e n t f a c i l i t a t e [or h i n d e r ] your p r o d u c t i v i t y ? " F a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s are a s s o c i a t e d w i t h the presence o r p o s i t i v e e f f e c t s of the f a c t o r r e f l e c t e d by a c a t e g o r y . H i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s are a s s o c i a t e d w i t h i t s absence o r n e g a t i v e e f f e c t . I n t e r a c t i o n w i t h Others The f i r s t major area focuses on c a t e g o r i e s which r e f l e c t d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t i n t e r a c t i o n o r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h o t h e r s a t work. A t o t a l of 89 i n c i d e n t s (41 f a c i l i t a t i n g and 48 h i n d e r i n g ) were r e p o r t e d under t h i s major a r e a i n f o u r c a t e g o r i e s . Support from Administration/Board/Government (14 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s ; 9 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o support, a s s i s t a n c e , encouragement, r e c o g n i t i o n and awards from c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , the c o l l e g e board, and/or government bodies such as the m i n i s t r y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r community c o l l e g e s . e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : "nomination f o r Dean's Award of E x c e l l e n c e " ( " r a i s e d my e x p e c t a t i o n s of myself t o be a l e r t f o r ways t o c o n t r i b u t e t o the t o t a l c o l l e g e " ) e.g., h i n d e r i n g : "Dean r e c e i v e s many p o s i t i v e l e t t e r s and comments r e g a r d i n g my courses and t e a c h i n g a b i l i t y , y e t i s not s u p p o r t i v e ( p r o f e s s i o n a l l y s u p p o r t i v e ) when needed" ("no 48 r e s p e c t f o r t h i s a d m i n i s t r a t o r and p r e f e r t o spend e n e r g i e s t e a c h i n g r a t h e r than i n committee work") L e a d e r s h i p by A d m i n i s t r a t i o n (5 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 29 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t e d t o c o n s u l t a t i o n , l i s t e n i n g , communication, o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e , d e l e g a t i o n , d i r e c t i o n , d e c i s i o n making, management s t y l e and s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n a t work as demonstrated by c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : "Being taken t o t a s k (by my immediate s u p e r v i s o r ) f o r work not completed due t o my having assumed too many a d d i t i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s " ("forced me t o reexamine my p r i o r i t i e s , l i m i t the number of e x t r a - c u r r i c u l a r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s I assume and drop some l e s s important r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s " ) e.g., h i n d e r i n g : " l a c k of ' r e a l l i s t e n i n g ' t o p e d a g o g i c a l concerns on b e h a l f of the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n " ( " i n h i b i t s f u r t h e r involvement and c u r t a i l s the s t r i v i n g f o r e x c e l l e n c e " ) C o l l e a g u e s (9 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 9 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o support, a s s i s t a n c e , encouragement, r e c o g n i t i o n and s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n a t work as demonstrated by f e l l o w f a c u l t y members a t the c o l l e g e as w e l l as c o l l e a g u e s a t o t h e r community c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s . e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : "the continuous t o t a l support of my immediate department c o l l e a g u e s , and the l a r g e r support of c o l l e a g u e s i n g e n e r a l , both f a c u l t y and s t a f f , p l u s the support of one o r two immediate s u p e r i o r s i n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n " ( " t h i s has g i v e n me the immeasurable s e c u r i t y of f e e l i n g r e s p e c t e d , my work and commitments taken s e r i o u s l y by my peers, and of being p a r t of a l a r g e r s u p p o r t i v e group") 49 e.g., h i n d e r i n g : "no response from c o l l e a g u e s when w r i t i n g s sent t o them" ("Why bother communicating w i t h c o l l e a g u e s ? " ) Students (13 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 1 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o response, feedback, performance, behavior and achievement as demonstrated by students d u r i n g and a f t e r t h e i r c o l l e g e s t u d i e s . e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : " r e c e i v i n g an e x c e l l e n t student e v a l u a t i o n " ("gives me the r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t my hard work i s not i n v a i n and t h a t I am a c c o m p l i s h i n g the t a s k which I s e t out t o do as a p r o f e s s i o n a l " ) e.g., h i n d e r i n g : "drop i n students" ("students i n t e r r u p t e d p r o d u c t i v i t y " ) Resources The second major area t i e s t o g e t h e r i n c i d e n t s and c a t e g o r i e s r e l a t e d t o a v a i l a b i l i t y o f r e s o u r c e s t o support c o l l e g e o p e r a t i o n s g e n e r a l l y and i n s t r u c t i o n p a r t i c u l a r l y . A t o t a l of 68 i n c i d e n t s (26 f a c i l i t a t i n g and 42 h i n d e r i n g ) were r e p o r t e d under t h i s major area i n f o u r c a t e g o r i e s . Equipment (12 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 9 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t e d t o a v a i l a b i l i t y and c o n d i t i o n of equipment, i n c l u d i n g computer r e l a t e d r e s o u r c e s , f o r classrooms, o f f i c e s and l a b o r a t o r i e s . e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : "replacement of out of date equipment i n my classroom" ("allowed me t o t e a c h new courses") 50 e.g., h i n d e r i n g : " l a c k of money t o purchase l a b s u p p l i e s and equipment" ("I have t o o c c a s i o n a l l y spend time 'scrounging' m a t e r i a l s from o t h e r i n s t r u c t o r s o r , 'around' the campus, e t c . I hate t a k i n g time i n the middle of a l e c t u r e / l a b , e t c . , t o f i x a s l i d e p r o j e c t o r , f i g u r e out what's wrong w i t h a microscope, e t c . " ) F a c i l i t i e s (4 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 15 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o a v a i l a b i l i t y , a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s and c o n d i t i o n of space, p h y s i c a l p l a n t and c o l l e g e f a c i l i t i e s maintenance. e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : "assignment of c l o s e d o f f i c e space" ( " d i s t r a c t i o n s e l i m i n a t e d , a b l e t o d e a l w i t h students more e f f e c t i v e l y " ) e.g., h i n d e r i n g : "classroom too crowded f o r both students and i n s t r u c t o r s - hot, s t u f f y , e t c . " ( " d i s t r a c t s both student & i n s t r u c t o r from work a t hand") Funding (1 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t , 6 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o g e n e r a l c o l l e g e f u n d i n g i s s u e s such as the c o l l e g e budget (or f o r a u n i t w i t h i n the c o l l e g e ) o r m i n i s t r y funding f o r programs. While o t h e r i n c i d e n t s o f t e n were a l s o a f f e c t e d by c o l l e g e budgets, o n l y those i n c i d e n t s which d e a l t w i t h f u n d i n g i n a g e n e r a l manner were i n c l u d e d here. I f a f u n d i n g r e l a t e d i n c i d e n t s p e c i f i e d , f o r example, computing equipment, i t was i n c l u d e d under the a p p r o p r i a t e r e s o u r c e s c a t e g o r y , i n t h i s case, equipment. e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : " o b t a i n i n g a s m a l l amount of c a p i t a l d o l l a r s " ("to r e p l a c e o r upgrade cl a s s r o o m equipment o r a i d s i s good f o r morale and makes one 51 f e e l t h a t one i s a p r o f e s s i o n a l and not simply p r e t e n d i n g t o be one") e.g., h i n d e r i n g : " s e r i o u s l a c k of fu n d i n g . C a p i t a l money i s not a v a i l a b l e a t a l l t o keep up w i t h changing technology" ("we are t r a i n i n g our students on out of date equipment when we s h o u l d be a t the f o r e f r o n t . I n d u s t r y i s not impressed") Support S e r v i c e s (9 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 12 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o the l i b r a r y c o l l e c t i o n and s e r v i c e s , a u d i o - v i s u a l c o l l e c t i o n and s e r v i c e s , a v a i l a b i l i t y of t r a i n i n g a i d s , c o u n s e l l i n g / a d v i s i n g s e r v i c e s and a d m i s s i o n / r e g i s t r a t i o n s e r v i c e s . e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : "support from AV department i n o r i e n t i n g my students t o equipment and procedures f o r t h e i r use r e course requirements" ("Supported & f a c i l i t a t e d my students i n meeting course requirements") e.g., h i n d e r i n g : " a f t e r t a k i n g much time t o p r i o r i t i z e r equests f o r p e r i o d i c a l s by the department, the L e a r n i n g Resources area made u n i l a t e r a l d e c i s i o n s which d i s r e g a r d e d s u g g e s t i o n s " ("my i n t e n t i o n s t o i n c r e a s e my and my students s c h o l a r l y r e a d i n g has been on h o l d . A l s o , q u e s t i o n the time we put i n t o t r y t o make h i g h q u a l i t y d e c i s i o n " ) Processes and P o l i c i e s The t h i r d major area covers i n c i d e n t s which r e l a t e t o c o l l e g e processes and p o l i c i e s . T h i s area d e a l s w i t h p e r s o n n e l r e l a t e d i n c i d e n t s , p r o f e s s i o n a l development and s c h e d u l i n g o f i n s t r u c t i o n a l and n o n i n s t r u c t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s . 52 A t o t a l of 67 i n c i d e n t s (43 f a c i l i t a t i n g and 24 h i n d e r i n g ) were r e p o r t e d under t h i s major area i n t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s . P e r s o n n e l Issues (1 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t , 13 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o e v a l u a t i o n s , e v a l u a t i o n p r o c e s s e s , compensation, t r a i n i n g a v a i l a b i l i t y and c o n t r a c t n e g o t i a t i o n s . e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : " c o n s u l t e d w i t h C h a i r p e r s o n r e how I c o u l d b e s t use my s k i l l s and t a l e n t s t o c o n t i n u e c o n t r i b u t i o n t o department. I asked f o r and got feedback r e p a s t r o l e " ("enabled me t o c o m f o r t a b l y c o n t i n u e i n c u r r i c u l u m l e a d e r s h i p r o l e w i t h v e r i f i e d support. I a l s o was f r e e r t o seek feedback from o t h e r s " ) e.g., h i n d e r i n g : "mega-evaluation" ("I p r e f e r immediate feedback from students but f e e l anxious about the time-consuming & l a b o r i o u s e v a l u a t i o n procedures which our c o l l e g e supports") P r o f e s s i o n a l Development (38 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 6 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s such as conferences, a r t i c u l a t i o n , workshops, c o u r s e s , s a b b a t i c a l s and r e a d i n g . I t a l s o i n c l u d e s s u p p o r t i n g f a c t o r s such as o p p o r t u n i t i e s , time, f u n d i n g and g e n e r a l support f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l development. e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : " a l l d i s c i p l i n e r e l a t e d p r o f e s s i o n a l development" ("allows t e a c h i n g o f new concepts w i t h g r e a t e r accuracy") e.g., h i n d e r i n g : " a p p l i e d f o r a 6 month s a b b a t i c a l t o f i n i s h a Master's degree and i t was not granted" ( " f e l t d e v a s tated f o r s e v e r a l months p a r t i c u l a r l y because I had r e c e i v e d e x c e l l e n t e v a l u a t i o n s & had served v e r y e f f e c t i v e l y on many c o l l e g e and department committees") 53 S c h e d u l i n g P r a c t i c e s (4 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 5 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o the s c h e d u l i n g o f c l a s s e s , meetings and exams. e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : "I was a b l e t o schedule a course which had t r a d i t i o n a l l y been taught evenings d u r i n g a morning b l o c k " ("1) had b e t t e r i n t e r a c t i o n w i t h my students as experi e n c e has taught me t h a t both students and me are t i r e d i n the evenings and so cover l e s s m a t e r i a l , l e s s w e l l . 2) more students were a b l e t o take (or i n t e r e s t e d i n t a k i n g ) the course i n the morning b l o c k and so enrolment went up, b r i n g i n g more students i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h t h a t d i s c i p l i n e " ) e.g., h i n d e r i n g : "an u n r e a l i s t i c a l l y t i g h t exam schedule and d e a d l i n e f o r s u b m i t t i n g f i n a l grades" ( " i n a b i l i t y t o assess students performance as c a r e f u l l y and completely as I deemed a p p r o p r i a t e ; d e m o r a l i z i n g e f f e c t of f e e l i n g the c o l l e g e does not share the same b a s i c academic v a l u e s as I do") Work A c t i v i t i e s The f o u r t h and f i n a l major area covers i n c i d e n t s which r e l a t e t o the work a c t i v i t i e s performed by community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y . A t o t a l of 106 i n c i d e n t s (61 f a c i l i t a t i n g and 45 h i n d e r i n g ) were r e p o r t e d under t h i s major area i n f o u r c a t e g o r i e s . Programming Issues (14 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 6 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o development of new courses and programs, unchanged courses and programs, e d u c a t i o n a l i n n o v a t i o n s and r e v i s i o n o f e x i s t i n g c o u r s e s . 54 e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : " l a r g e s t continuous i n c i d e n t over the years has been the freedom, t r u s t and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y w i t h i n the Dept. t o r e s e a r c h , d e s i g n and implement my own c o u r s e s , and has r e s u l t e d i n h i g h p r o d u c t i v i t y " ( " t h i s puts me i n a p o s i t i o n of d i r e c t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o my students and community, c h a l l e n g e s my commitment, i n t e r e s t , c r e a t i v i t y and a b i l i t i e s as n o t h i n g e l s e could") e.g., h i n d e r i n g : " i n n o v a t i v e & c r e a t i v e i d e a s r e l a t e d t o t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s t o support i n d i v i d u a l l e a r n i n g s t y l e s & s e l f - d i r e c t e d l e a r n i n g were squelched" ( " f e l t depressed & f r u s t r a t e d e s p e c i a l l y when students v e r y s t r o n g l y supported these s t r a t e g i e s " ) Secondary Du t i e s (11 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 17 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o secondary d u t i e s o f t e n expected t o be performed by community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y such as committees, meetings, p e r i p h e r a l t a s k s , s p e c i a l r e q u e s t s and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s . e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : "I was nominated t o r e p r e s e n t my dept on a c o l l e g e - w i d e committee" ("helped me become b e t t e r informed about c o l l e g e -wide i s s u e s and became acquainted w i t h more c o l l e a g u e s . As a r e s u l t I want t o p a r t i c i p a t e more i n areas t h a t go beyond my immediate c l a s s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s & f e e l t h a t my c o n t r i b u t i o n ( i d e a s , comments, et c . ) are v a l u e d by both my dept and the c o l l e g e as a whole") e.g., h i n d e r i n g : "becoming too h e a v i l y i n v o l v e d w i t h committee work and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d u t i e s " ("compromised the amount of time a v a i l a b l e f o r p r e p a r i n g l e s s o n m a t e r i a l s and i n t e r a c t i n g w i t h students") Workload (15 f a c i l i t a t i n g , 18 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g an i n s t r u c t o r ' s workload such as c l a s s s i z e s , 55 number of s e c t i o n s t o teach, r e l e a s e time f o r a d d i t i o n a l o r s p e c i a l d u t i e s and ge n e r a l s t a f f i n g l e v e l s . e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : "the c o l l e g e agreed t o h i r e a l a b a s s i s t a n t f o r the computer l a b s " ("the workload p r i o r t o t h i s i n c i d e n t was so heavy t h a t i t was not p o s s i b l e t o be an e f f e c t i v e i n s t r u c t o r nor t o c a r r y out many of the p o i n t s p r o p e r l y i n your d e f i n i t i o n of p r o d u c t i v i t y " ) e.g., h i n d e r i n g : "having too many d i v e r s e r o l e s a t once" ("I f i n d a t times I'm not f u l f i l l i n g any as w e l l as I'd l i k e . I run out of time and energy") Work Roles (21 f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s , 4 h i n d e r i n g ) T h i s c a t e g o r y r e f l e c t s i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o the r o l e s and work assignments of i n d i v i d u a l f a c u l t y such as new, d i f f e r e n t o r unchanged r o l e s and assignments. e.g., f a c i l i t a t i n g : "my r e c e n t appointment as department c h a i r p e r s o n " ( " a f t e r t e a c h i n g f o r 8 ye a r s the o p p o r t u n i t y t o take on a new c h a l l e n g e i s m o t i v a t i n g . The appointment a l s o confirms a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ' s f a i t h i n my a b i l i t i e s " ) e.g., h i n d e r i n g : "teaching r e p e t i t i o u s i n f o r m a t i o n over a p e r i o d of y e a r s " ("decreased m o t i v a t i o n ; i n c r e a s e d s t a g n a t i o n " ) The most f r e q u e n t l y d e s c r i b e d f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t by f a c u l t y from both c o l l e g e s was P r o f e s s i o n a l Development, a c c o u n t i n g f o r 38 of the 171 i n c i d e n t s . Work Roles and Workload r e p o r t e d 21 and 15 i n c i d e n t s r e s p e c t f u l l y . A l l o t h e r c a t e g o r i e s r e p o r t e d l e s s than 15 i n c i d e n t s . T a b l e 13 i l l u s t r a t e s the frequency w i t h which each c a t e g o r y was r e p o r t e d . 56 TABLE 13 : FREQUENCY OF FACILITATING AND HINDERING INCIDENTS A. Interaction with Others Support from Administration Leadership by Administration Colleagues Students Subtotals Facilitating Hindering 14 5 9 M 41 9 29 9 _1 48 Total 23 34 18 14 89 B. Resources Equipment Facilities Funding Support Services Subtotals 12 4 1 _9 26 9 15 6 _12 42 21 19 7 21 68 C. Processes and Policies Personnel Issues Professional Development Scheduling Practices Subtotals 1 38 _4 43 13 6 _5 24 14 44 _9 67 D. Work Activities Programming Issues Secondary Duties Workload Work Roles Subtotals 14 11 15 _21 61 6 17 18 _4 45 20 28 33 25 106 Totals 171 159 330 T a b l e 13 a l s o i l l u s t r a t e s the frequency w i t h which h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s were r e p o r t e d . L e a d e r s h i p by A d m i n i s t r a t i o n was r e p o r t e d most f r e q u e n t l y and accounted f o r 29 of the 159 r e p o r t e d h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s . Workload, Secondary D u t i e s and F a c i l i t i e s f o l l o w e d w i t h 18, 17, and 15 h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s r e s p e c t f u l l y r e p o r t e d . The remaining c a t e g o r i e s r e p o r t e d l e s s than 15 h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s each. The frequency of r e p o r t e d f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s f o r 57 each c a t e g o r y when comparing F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e i s s i m i l a r except i n the f o l l o w i n g i n s t a n c e s . Red Deer r e p o r t e d 10 i n c i d e n t s r e f l e c t i n g Support by Administration/Board/Government compared t o F r a s e r V a l l e y ' s 4 i n c i d e n t s . S i m i l a r l y , Red Deer r e p o r t e d 25 f a c i l i t a t i n g P r o f e s s i o n a l Development i n c i d e n t s t o F r a s e r V a l l e y ' s 13, and 14 f a c i l i t a t i n g Work Roles i n c i d e n t s t o F r a s e r V a l l e y ' s 7. On the o t h e r hand, F r a s e r V a l l e y r e p o r t e d 10 Equipment r e l a t e d f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s t o Red Deer's 2. The c o l l e g e s were almost equal i n r e p o r t i n g h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s . The o n l y n o t i c e a b l e d i f f e r e n c e i s w i t h r e s p e c t t o Secondary D u t i e s w i t h Red Deer C o l l e g e r e p o r t i n g 15 i n c i d e n t s t o F r a s e r V a l l e y ' s 2. V i t a l i t y F a c t o r s A f f e c t i n g P r o d u c t i v i t y The P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r Assessment s e c t i o n o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e used f a c t o r s i d e n t i f i e d by the l i t e r a t u r e as a f f e c t i n g f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and asked respondents t o " c i r c l e the number [on a 5 p o i n t b i p o l a r i n t e r v a l r a t i n g s c a l e ] which corresponds t o your p e r c e p t i o n o f the p r i o r i t y the f a c t o r has i n a f f e c t i n g your p r o d u c t i v i t y . " T h i s s e c t i o n was f i r s t a nalyzed by summing the numer i c a l weights of the responses t o each f a c t o r (from a minimum of 1 f o r low p r i o r i t y t o a maximum of 5 f o r h i g h p r i o r i t y ) and d i v i d i n g by the number of responses t o t h a t 58 f a c t o r t o o b t a i n i t s mean response. Once a mean response had been c a l c u l a t e d f o r each f a c t o r the f a c t o r s were ranked i n descending o r d e r of t h e i r mean responses (see Tab l e 14). A l l f a c t o r s r e c e i v e d a mean r a t i n g o f t h r e e o r h i g h e r on the f i v e p o i n t s c a l e . T a b l e 14 d i s p l a y s the r a t i n g s i n descending o r d e r , grouped i n .5 mean ranges, i . e . , means from 4.50-5.00 were grouped as were means from 4.00-4.49, 3.50-3.99, and 3.00-3.49. The standard d e v i a t i o n f o r the f a c t o r s tended t o i n c r e a s e as the mean decreased. A work environment which supports q u a l i t y r e c e i v e d the h i g h e s t r a t i n g w i t h a 4.72 mean. F u l f i l l i n g , s a t i s f y i n g and s t i m u l a t i n g work r e c e i v e d the next h i g h e s t means w i t h 4.70, 4.67 and 4.65 r e s p e c t f u l l y . The remaining f a c t o r s which r e c e i v e d r a t i n g s of 4.50 or hi g h e r were o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o l e a r n new t h i n g s (4.63), a manageable workload (4.62), o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l development (4.52), and f a i r n e s s i n d e c i s i o n making (4.50). In c o n t r a s t , the lowest r a t e d f a c t o r s were a p p r o p r i a t e l i b r a r y h o l d i n g s (3.43), contemporary l a b equipment (3.36), adequate l a b o r a t o r y space (3.34), o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r o u t s i d e p r o f e s s i o n a l c o n s u l t i n g (3.26), o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r temporary nonacademic assignments (3.26), o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r h i e r a r c h i c a l advancement (3.10), and o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o t e a c h i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y courses (3.00). 59 TABLE 14: PRODUCTIVITY FACTOR MEANS Work Related Factor Mean 1 SD _ n i a work environment which supports quality 4.72 0.55 100 fulfilling work 4.70 0.63 100 satisfying work 4.67 0.62 100 stimulating work 4.65 0.59 100 opportunities to learn new things 4.63 0.56 100 a manageable work load 4.62 0.69 100 opportunities for professional development 4.52 0.67 100 fairness in decision making 4.50 0.75 100 intellectual freedom 4.47 0.72 100 stimulation of good students 4.40 -0.70 99 opportunities to take on new challenges 4.35 0.73 100 a college environment that is flexible 4.33 0.78 99 openness in decision making 4.29 0.84 100 stimulation of colleagues 4.23 0.76 100 opportunities for career growth 4.22 0.86 100 opportunities to attend professional meetings 3.96 0.91 100 adequate compensation 3.96 0.96 100 an informal work environment 3.92 0.93 99 opportunities for sabbatical leaves 3.86 1.30 100 opportunities to teach new courses 3.83 0.89 100 opportunities for instructional development 3.83 0.98 100 appreciation by administration 3.80 1.05 100 meaningful faculty participation in governance 3.78 1.06 100 opportunities to teach different courses 3.77 1.00 100 opportunities to take on new responsibilities 3.75 0.99 100 recognition by administration 3.64 1.16 99 clear institutional priorities 3.63 1.18 99 clear institutional objectives 3.52 1.16 99 appropriate library holdings 3.43 1.15 100 contemporary laboratory equipment 3:36 1.52 94 adequate laboratory space 3.34 1.54 95 opportunities for outside professional consulting 3.26 1.13 100 opportunities for temporary nonacademic assignments 3.26 1.14 100 opportunities for hierarchical advancement 3.10 1.07 100 opportunities to teach interdisciplinary courses 3.00 1.08 100 Based on a 5-point bipolar rating scale with 5 identified as high priority and 1 as low priority. Respondents were asked to, "circle the number which corresponds to your perception of the priority the factor has in affecting your productivity." 2 A total of 101 qualified respondents completed the survey. For this section 1 respondent did not provide useable answers. Supplemental Analyses 60 The r e s u l t s from the P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r Assessment s e c t i o n o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e were compared t o r e s u l t s from the P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r I d e n t i f i c a t i o n s e c t i o n t o note s i m i l a r i t i e s and d i f f e r e n c e s . While these two s e t s o f r e s u l t s were not designed f o r comparison, and thus not a l l f a c t o r s on one l i s t had comparable f a c t o r s on another, i t i s of i n t e r e s t t o note p r o f e s s i o n a l development, t h e most f r e q u e n t l y (44) c i t e d i n c i d e n t by f a c u l t y , was a l s o one o f the h i g h e s t r a t e d f a c t o r s i n the P r o d u c t i v i t y F a c t o r Assessment s e c t i o n (a mean of 4.52 f o r o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l development). S i m i l a r l y , l e a d e r s h i p was the second f a c t o r w i t h the most i n c i d e n t s (34) and i t i s i n p a r t r e f l e c t e d i n the h i g h r a t i n g s g i v e n f a i r n e s s i n d e c i s i o n making (4.50), openness i n d e c i s i o n making (4.29), and a c o l l e g e environment t h a t i s f l e x i b l e (4.33). Workload had the t h i r d h i g h e s t number of i n c i d e n t s (33) and i t s c o r r e s p o n d i n g f a c t o r , manageable workload, was a l s o h i g h l y r a t e d w i t h a mean of 4.62. Col l e a g u e s and students o n l y r e c o r d e d 18 and 14 i n c i d e n t s r e s p e c t i v e l y y e t s t i m u l a t i o n o f good students and s t i m u l a t i o n o f c o l l e a g u e s r a t e d h i g h l y w i t h means of 4.40 and 4.23 r e s p e c t i v e l y . 61 R e l i a b i l i t y and V a l i d i t y Questions about r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y are r a i s e d i n o r d e r t o judge the degree t o which a study's f i n d i n g s can be t r u s t e d . But the i s s u e of t r u s t cannot be d e a l t w i t h on an a l l o r n o t h i n g b a s i s ; numerous p r o c e d u r a l and environmental f a c t o r s e x i s t which i n d i v i d u a l l y o r c o l l e c t i v e l y a f f e c t r e s e a r c h r e s u l t s . T h i s complexity means the assessment o f t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s becomes one of degree as opposed t o a yes/no o r p a s s / f a i l d e c i s i o n . I t i s necessary, t h e r e f o r e , t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n about r e s e a r c h processes used and r e s e a r c h c o n d i t i o n s experienced so o t h e r s can be i n an informed p o s i t i o n t o determine f o r themselves the r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y of a study. F o r q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h such as t h i s case study, the r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y i s s u e s can be e f f e c t i v e l y addressed by f o c u s i n g on key elements of the methodology. The f o l l o w i n g examines aspects of the r e s e a r c h d e s i g n and a p p l i c a t i o n of the D e l p h i technique and c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t method. A d e c i s i o n t o be made i n the d e s i g n of t h i s study was whether the r e s e a r c h was t o be conducted o n l y a t the c o l l e g e where the r e s e a r c h e r was employed. T h i s o p t i o n , a p p e a l i n g because o f the s i m p l i f i e d r e s e a r c h p r o c e s s , was r e j e c t e d i n o r d e r t o reduce the e f f e c t of p o s s i b l e b i a s e s r e s u l t i n g from the r e s e a r c h e r ' s involvement w i t h and knowledge of f a c u l t y 62 and c o n d i t i o n s a t t h a t i n s t i t u t i o n . Merriam (1988, p. 169, p. 172) suggests m u l t i p l e methods and/or sources o f da t a c o l l e c t i o n and a n a l y s i s , r e f l e c t e d i n t h i s study by the c o l l e c t i o n o f data from two c o l l e g e s , as a s t r a t e g y t o e s t a b l i s h r e l i a b i l i t y and i n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y . As i l l u s t r a t e d i n the f i n d i n g s a l r e a d y presented, the s i m i l a r i t y i n r e s u l t s between the two c o l l e g e s supports the case f o r s u g g e s t i n g t h i s study has an a c c e p t a b l e l e v e l o f r e l i a b i l i t y . I n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y of the D e l p h i procedure was strengthened by a s k i n g p a r t i c i p a n t s t o a s s i g n c a t e g o r i e s , developed by the r e s e a r c h e r from the group's Round One responses, t o t h e i r own Round One responses. Merriam (1988, p. 169) r e f e r s t o t h i s p r o c e s s as member checks, a procedure where those from whom dat a and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s were d e r i v e d are asked t o judge the r e s u l t s , t hereby i n c r e a s i n g i n t e r n a l v a l i d i t y . As Ta b l e 15 i l l u s t r a t e s , the assignment of c a t e g o r i e s by TABLE 15: CATEGORIZATION BT DELPHI RESPONDENTS D e s c r i p t i o n Number % T o t a l measures r e p o r t e d i n Round One 118 Responses not r e c e i v e d i n Round Two 5 Measures c a t e g o r i z e d i n Round Two 113 Measures a s s i g n e d t o 'other' 6 5 .3% Measures matched 75 66 .4% Measures s a t i s f i e d by o t h e r c a t e g o r i e s 32 28 .3% T o t a l 113 100 .0% p a r t i c i p a n t s matched 66.4% of the r e s e a r c h e r ' s c a t e g o r y assignments. The ca t e g o r y scheme i t s e l f supported 94.7% of 63 the measures o r i g i n a l l y r e p o r t e d by p a r t i c i p a n t s i n Round One (a combining o f c a t e g o r i e s which matched and those which d i d not but which were s a t i s f i e d by o t h e r c a t e g o r i e s i n the c a t e g o r y scheme). The q u e s t i o n o f e x t e r n a l v a l i d i t y , however, i s d i f f i c u l t t o address f o r q u a l i t a t i v e case s t u d i e s . Merriam (1988, p. 173) s t a t e s t h a t f o r r e s e a r c h e r s approaching e x t e r n a l v a l i d i t y from an experimental o r c o r r e l a t i o n a l d e s i g n p e r s p e c t i v e " g e n e r a l i z i n g from a s i n g l e case s e l e c t e d i n a p u r p o s e f u l r a t h e r than random manner makes no sense a t a l l . " She goes on t o say "one s e l e c t s a case study approach because one wishes t o understand the p a r t i c u l a r i n depth, not because one wants t o know what i s g e n e r a l l y t r u e o f the many." From t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e e x t e r n a l v a l i d i t y o r g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y would be r e j e c t e d and c o n s i d e r e d a l i m i t a t i o n o f case study q u a l i t a t i v e r e s e a r c h . A l t e r n a t i v e l y , Merriam (1988, p. 174) suggests e x t e r n a l v a l i d i t y can be strengthened by conducting m u l t i - s i t e case s t u d i e s and through u s i n g standard sampling procedures, predetermined q u e s t i o n s and s p e c i f i c procedures f o r c o d i n g and a n a l y s i s . Based on the l a t t e r view, e x t e r n a l v a l i d i t y f o r t h i s study was strengthened by use of two c o l l e g e s f o r da t a c o l l e c t i o n , use of standard sampling procedures f o r s e l e c t i o n o f the p i l o t study p a r t i c i p a n t s and p a r t o f the D e l p h i group s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , predetermined q u e s t i o n s f o r use i n the D e l p h i study and the q u e s t i o n n a i r e used i n the 64 survey of fa c u l t y , and s p e c i f i c procedures for analysis of the Delphi and questionnaire data. The r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y of the c r i t i c a l incident technique was assessed by Andersson and Nilsson (1964). They s p e c i f i c a l l y addressed comprehensiveness of data c o l l e c t e d , r e l i a b i l i t y of c o l l e c t i n g procedures and control of categorization. They suggested, based on the findings of t h e i r study, that i t was j u s t i f i a b l e to conclude the c r i t i c a l incident method was both r e l i a b l e and v a l i d . A concern i n use of the c r i t i c a l incident method i s whether or not the data c o l l e c t e d i s comprehensive enough to r e f l e c t a l l types of relevant incidents or whether data c o l l e c t i o n had been cut o f f too early. In the Andersson and Nilsson (1964, p. 399-400) study 95% of a l l subcategories had appeared a f t e r two-thirds of the incidents had been c l a s s i f i e d . They concluded that data c o l l e c t i o n had been comprehensive. As a check on comprehensiveness f o r t h i s study q u a l i f i e d incidents were reviewed i n the order i n which the questionnaires were received back from respondents. By the 26th of the 101 useable questionnaires a l l 15 categories were accounted f o r . This suggests data c o l l e c t i o n was not cut o f f too early. The Andersson and Nilsson (1964, p. 400) study reported an average of f i v e incidents c o l l e c t e d from each person interviewed and two and one-half from each one sent a questionnaire. Their questionnaire had a response rate of 65 24%. T h i s study o b t a i n e d an average of 3.3 i n c i d e n t s per q u e s t i o n n a i r e w i t h a q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e t u r n r a t e o f 51.2% (48.3% u s e a b l e ) . These f i g u r e s compare f a v o u r a b l y w i t h the Andersson and N i l s s o n (1964) study and, w h i l e not a b l e t o c o n f i r m r e l i a b i l i t y o f c o l l e c t i n g procedures by themselves, suggest these procedures are l i k e l y t o have been r e l i a b l e . T h i s i s f u r t h e r supported by the s i m i l a r i t y i n the number o f i n c i d e n t s r e p o r t e d by the two c o l l e g e s : 46.7% from F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and 53.3% from Red Deer C o l l e g e . F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e r e p o r t e d 154 i n c i d e n t s (75 f a c i l i t a t i n g and 79 h i n d e r i n g ) compared t o Red Deer C o l l e g e r e p o r t i n g 176 (96 f a c i l i t a t i n g and 80 h i n d e r i n g ) . Except f o r a few v a r i a t i o n s as r e p o r t e d i n the f i n d i n g s s e c t i o n , the nature o f i n c i d e n t s r e p o r t e d by both c o l l e g e s was s i m i l a r . The nature o f c a t e g o r i z a t i o n i s such t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o develop more than one ca t e g o r y scheme f o r a g i v e n s e t of i n c i d e n t s . The frame of r e f e r e n c e used w i l l v a r y w i t h the intended use of the data (Flanagan, 1954; Woolsey, 1986). Flanagan (1954, p. 344) suggested t e n t a t i v e c a t e g o r i e s be submitted t o o t h e r s f o r review on the b a s i s t h a t c o n f i r m a t i o n by others o f c a t e g o r i z a t i o n judgements i s u s u a l l y r e a s s u r i n g . Andersson and N i l s s o n (1964, pp. 400-401) used a r e l a t e d approach t o check the r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e i r c a t e g o r i z a t i o n w i t h r e s u l t i n g c a t e g o r i z a t i o n agreement r e s u l t s r a n g i n g from 75% t o 85%. In t h i s study f o u r c o l l e a g u e s (two t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y , one nonteaching f a c u l t y , one a d m i n i s t r a t o r ) were asked t o independently c a t e g o r i z e the 67 i n c i d e n t s r e p o r t e d i n a 20% random sample o f u s e a b l e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . The mean agreement was 72.8% (83.6% f o r t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y and 61.9% f o r nonteaching f a c u l t y and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ) w i t h a median agreement of 77.6%. Responses from the f o u r were 86.6%, 80.6%, 77.6% and 46.3% w i t h 100% agreement f o r 38.8% of the i n c i d e n t s and 75% agreement f o r 32.8%. These r e s u l t s compare f a v o u r a b l y w i t h the Andersson and N i l s s o n (1964) study, s u g g e s t i n g the c a t e g o r i z a t i o n scheme used i n t h i s study was r e l i a b l e . 67 CHAPTER 5 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION Summary T h i s r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t i n v e s t i g a t e d which work r e l a t e d f a c t o r s , as r e p o r t e d by f u l l - t i m e c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y members a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e , f a c i l i t a t e d o r h i n d e r e d the p r o d u c t i v i t y o f t h e s e community c o l l e g e i n s t r u c t o r s . A second problem was t o i n v e s t i g a t e the e x t e n t t o which a composite s e t of f a c t o r s , based on those suggested i n the l i t e r a t u r e as a f f e c t i n g v i t a l i t y , was p e r c e i v e d by the f a c u l t y t o a f f e c t t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . The r e s e a r c h was d e s c r i p t i v e , extending f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y and v i t a l i t y i n q u i r y i n t o the community c o l l e g e c o n t e x t u s i n g a case study approach. A c r o s s - s e c t i o n a l s u r v e y d e s i g n was used t o o b t a i n data from a 100% sample, o r census. The c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t technique was used i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e t o c o l l e c t data from f a c u l t y about i n c i d e n t s t h e y p e r c e i v e d as having had a p e r s o n a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . A d e f i n i t i o n of community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y f o r use i n the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t p r o c e s s was developed u s i n g a twelve member D e l p h i group c o n s i s t i n g of t h r e e f a c u l t y and t h r e e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s from each c o l l e g e . 68 R a t i n g o f the composite s e t of v i t a l i t y f a c t o r s was accomplished by a s k i n g the respondents t o r a t e each f a c t o r on a f i v e p o i n t b i p o l a r r a t i n g s c a l e based on t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n o f the p r i o r i t y each f a c t o r had i n a f f e c t i n g t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . S i x o f the 107 r e t u r n e d q u e s t i o n n a i r e s had t o be r e j e c t e d because the respondents d i d not f i t the t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n . The number of usable r e t u r n e d q u e s t i o n n a i r e s was 47 from F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and 54 from Red Deer C o l l e g e f o r a t o t a l of 101. T h i s was equal t o a t o t a l response r a t e o f 48.3% (61.8% from F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and 40.6% from Red Deer C o l l e g e ) . The 330 i n c i d e n t s c o l l e c t e d by the q u e s t i o n n a i r e (171 f a c i l i t a t i n g , 159 h i n d e r i n g ) were c l a s s i f i e d , as summarized below, i n t o 15 i n c i d e n t c a t e g o r i e s which i n t u r n were a b l e t o be grouped i n t o f o u r major areas each of which p r o v i d e s a theme f o r the r e l a t e d c a t e g o r i e s they c o n t a i n (Table 16). A l l f a c t o r s i n the composite s e t of v i t a l i t y r e l a t e d f a c t o r s r e c e i v e d a minimum mean r a t i n g of t h r e e on the f i v e p o i n t s c a l e . Those w i t h h i g h e s t means were 'a work environment which supports q u a l i t y ' (4.72), ' f u l f i l l i n g work' (4.70), ' s a t i s f y i n g work' (4.67), ' s t i m u l a t i n g work' (4.65), ' o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o l e a r n new t h i n g s ' (4.63), 'a manageable workload' (4.62), ' o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r p r o f e s s i o n a l development' (4.52), and ' f a i r n e s s i n d e c i s i o n making' (4.50) . TABLE 16: SUMMARY OF FACTORS AFFECTING PRODUCTIVITY 69 A. I n t e r a c t i o n w i t h Others 1. Support from A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 2. L e a d e r s h i p by A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 3. C o l l e a g u e s 4. Students B. Resources 5. Equipment 6. F a c i l i t i e s 7. Funding 8. Support S e r v i c e s C. Processes and P o l i c i e s 9. Per s o n n e l Issues 10. P r o f e s s i o n a l Development 11. S c h e d u l i n g P r a c t i c e s D. Work A c t i v i t i e s 12. Programming Issues 13. Secondary Duties 14. Workload 15. Work Roles C o n c l u s i o n s and I m p l i c a t i o n s The l i t e r a t u r e p e r t a i n i n g t o f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y p r o v i d e d a b a s i s from which an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f f a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y c o u l d be approached. Though most p r e v i o u s r e s e a r c h and w r i t i n g s focused on u n i v e r s i t i e s and f o u r y e a r c o l l e g e s , t h e i r procedures, f i n d i n g s and thoughts p r o v i d e d guidance f o r an i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y i n community c o l l e g e s . T h i s study suggests 15 f a c t o r s be taken i n t o account when c o n s i d e r i n g f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e . I t a l s o p r o v i d e s means of 70 i n s t r u c t o r s ' r a t i n g s of the degree t o which 35 f a c t o r s , suggested i n the l i t e r a t u r e as i n f l u e n c i n g f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y , a r e p e r c e i v e d by f a c u l t y a t these c o l l e g e s t o a f f e c t t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . The f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s and i m p l i c a t i o n s are drawn from a review and assessment of the f i n d i n g s . 1. The frequency of i n c i d e n t s by c a t e g o r y s h o u l d not be the o n l y measure of c a t e g o r y importance because f r e q u e n c i e s may v a r y by i n s t i t u t i o n , by i n s t r u c t o r , and over time. The i n c i d e n t s p e r c e i v e d by f a c u l t y t o have a f f e c t e d t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y were r e p o r t e d by showing the f r e q u e n c i e s f o r i n c i d e n t c a t e g o r i e s . While r e s u l t s were t a b u l a t e d i n t h i s way t o adequately d i s c l o s e the data o b t a i n e d , a word of c a u t i o n i s necessary. Frequencies a s s o c i a t e d w i t h c a t e g o r i e s s h o u l d not be c o n s i d e r e d the o n l y measure of importance because those w i t h o n l y a few i n c i d e n t s may a l s o be meaningful (Andersson and N i l s s o n , 1964, p. 402). S i m i l a r l y , Woolsey (1986, p. 250) suggests f o r c i n g of d a t a i n t o c a t e g o r i e s w i t h r o u g h l y an equal number of i n c i d e n t s may d i s t o r t c a t e g o r i e s i n o t h e r ways. I f the C l a r k , Boyer and Corcoran (1985, p. 10) comment r e g a r d i n g f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y i s r e c a l l e d , f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y (and by a s s o c i a t i o n f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y ) seems t o be context s p e c i f i c and r e f l e c t s both i n s t i t u t i o n a l type and m i s s i o n . T h i s i m p l i e s t h a t v a r y i n g types of i n c i d e n t s may be r e p o r t e d a t d i f f e r e n t times and among i n s t i t u t i o n s (e.g., o n l y 2 h i n d e r i n g 71 i n c i d e n t s r e l a t i n g t o secondary d u t i e s were r e p o r t e d by F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e f a c u l t y w h i l e Red Deer C o l l e g e f a c u l t y r e p o r t e d 15). What i s important, t h e r e f o r e , i s the c a t e g o r y i t s e l f and change i n frequency of i n c i d e n t s f o r t h a t c a t e g o r y over time f o r a p a r t i c u l a r c o l l e g e . F o r c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n t h i s i m p l i e s the need t o be s e n s i t i v e t o changing c o n d i t i o n s a t t h e i r i n s t i t u t i o n f o r f a c u l t y i n d i v i d u a l l y and c o l l e c t i v e l y . 2. The c a t e g o r i e s r e f l e c t an open r a t h e r than c l o s e d c l a s s i f i c a t i o n system and as such are i n t e r r e l a t e d . The c a t e g o r i e s were e s t a b l i s h e d t o c l a s s i f y the i n c i d e n t s i n as meaningful a way as p o s s i b l e , t o be s p e c i f i c enough t o p r o v i d e a l e v e l of d e t a i l h e l p f u l t o u s e r s o f t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n and y e t g e n e r a l enough t o be a b l e t o communicate a framework from which t o understand the component c a t e g o r i e s . T h i s c a t e g o r i z a t i o n does not imply such f i r m demarcations between c a t e g o r i e s t h a t no r e l a t i o n s h i p t o o t h e r c a t e g o r i e s e x i s t s . For example, a l a c k of 'funding' c o u l d have a n e g a t i v e impact on the 'equipment' and ' f a c i l i t i e s ' a v a i l a b l e f o r i n s t r u c t i o n but t h i s c o u l d be o f f s e t by i n n o v a t i v e ' e d u c a t i o n a l programming' o r 'scheduling p r a c t i c e s . ' S i m i l a r l y , an i n s t r u c t o r ' s heavy 'workload' c o u l d have a l i m i t i n g e f f e c t on the 'secondary d u t i e s ' he/she engages i n and be f u r t h e r l i m i t e d by n e g a t i v e outcomes of ' l e a d e r s h i p by a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . ' As opposed t o b e i n g a c l o s e d system o f 72 c a t e g o r i e s where one has no r e l a t i o n s h i p t o another, t h e s e c a t e g o r i e s r e f l e c t c o n d i t i o n s which i n t e r r e l a t e w i t h o t h e r c a t e g o r i e s and c o n d i t i o n s . T h e r e f o r e , changes i n c o n d i t i o n s of one dimension may have an e f f e c t on the c o n d i t i o n o f o t h e r s . 3. The c a t e g o r i e s r e f l e c t both f a c i l i t a t i n g and h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s . C a t e g o r i z a t i o n of i n c i d e n t s r e s u l t e d i n a scheme which i n c l u d e d both f a c i l i t a t i n g and h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s . In some i n s t a n c e s the presence of a f a c t o r would be f a c i l i t a t i n g (e.g., support by a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , equipment, f a c i l i t i e s and p r o f e s s i o n a l development) w h i l e i t s absence would be h i n d e r i n g . In o t h e r cases the i s s u e i s not the presence o r absence of a f a c t o r , r a t h e r i t i s the p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e e f f e c t of a p a r t i c u l a r a c t i o n o r c o n d i t i o n a t the c o l l e g e . F o r example, l e a d e r s h i p by a d m i n i s t r a t i o n was a matter of whether the l e a d e r s h i p a c t i o n had a p e r c e i v e d p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e e f f e c t on f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y . S i m i l a r l y , workload, work r o l e s and secondary d u t i e s concerned the p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e r e s u l t s of these f a c t o r s as opposed t o t h e i r presence o r absence. The i m p l i c a t i o n i s t h a t e f f e c t s on p r o d u c t i v i t y appear not t o be r e s t r i c t e d t o i n c i d e n t s a r i s i n g from the presence o r absence of p a r t i c u l a r f a c t o r s . A l s o t o be c o n s i d e r e d are the p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e p e r c e p t i o n s which r e s u l t from a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a c t i o n s o r o t h e r c o l l e g e c o n d i t i o n s . T h i s s i t u a t i o n makes the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e t a s k more d i f f i c u l t . I t i s not j u s t a matter of e n s u r i n g a p a r t i c u l a r f a c t o r i s p r o v i d e d i n o r d e r t o f a c i l i t a t e f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y . One must a l s o be c o g n i s a n t o f i n d i v i d u a l and c o l l e c t i v e f a c u l t y p e r c e p t i o n s i n response t o c o l l e g e c o n d i t i o n s . 4. F a c t o r s suggested by the l i t e r a t u r e as a f f e c t i n g v i t a l i t y are p e r c e i v e d by f a c u l t y t o a f f e c t t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y but these r e s u l t s may hide a d i v e r s i t y o f views f o r a p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n . A l l f a c t o r s r e c e i v e d a mean r a t i n g o f t h r e e o r more on a f i v e p o i n t s c a l e w i t h one as low p r i o r i t y and f i v e as h i g h . T h i s suggests the f a c t o r s are p e r c e i v e d by f a c u l t y c o l l e c t i v e l y t o a f f e c t f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y . However, the broad range of responses t o many f a c t o r s and the r e s u l t i n g r e l a t i v e l y h i g h standard d e v i a t i o n s suggest f a c u l t y a re not u n i t e d i n t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s and t h a t r e a c t i o n s t o a p a r t i c u l a r f a c t o r may be d i v e r s e . 5. The f a c t o r s i d e n t i f i e d as f a c i l i t a t i n g o r h i n d e r i n g community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y s hould not be i n t e r p r e t e d as a p p l i c a b l e i n a l l s i t u a t i o n s o r f o r a l l f a c u l t y . I t i s v e r y easy t o assume a f a c t o r such as 'work r o l e s ' , i f viewed from a f a c i l i t a t i n g p e r s p e c t i v e , means t h a t a l l f a c u l t y w i l l b e n e f i t from a change i n t h e i r r o l e s from time t o time. While the data from t h i s study suggests many have found t h i s f a c t o r t o have f a c i l i t a t e d t h e i r 74 p r o d u c t i v i t y / a d m i n i s t r a t o r s should a l s o note a number o f f a c u l t y found these changes hindered t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y . Given the d u a l i t y of these c a t e g o r i e s c a u t i o n s h o u l d be used i n a p p l y i n g measures t o p a r t i c u l a r s i t u a t i o n s . Not a l l i n s t r u c t o r s w i l l respond the same way. 6. By drawing on the ethos of two community c o l l e g e s t h i s study has c o n t r i b u t e d t o the knowledge base as i t p e r t a i n s t o f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y i n the community c o l l e g e . The f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y l i t e r a t u r e d e a l s p r i m a r i l y w i t h u n i v e r s i t i e s and f o u r y e a r c o l l e g e s . T h i s study focused e x c l u s i v e l y on the community c o l l e g e and as a r e s u l t p r o v i d e s an i n s i g h t t o f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y and v i t a l i t y i n a working environment without graduate s t u d e n t s , s e n i o r students and r e s e a r c h r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s f o r i n s t r u c t o r s . P o s s i b l e A p p l i c a t i o n s While one can not g e n e r a l i z e from these f i n d i n g s i t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note the r e s u l t s of t h i s r e s e a r c h suggest a number o f a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r a d m i n i s t r a t o r s of F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e . The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n scheme f o r i n c i d e n t s r e p o r t e d by f a c u l t y p r o v i d e s a mechanism f o r s e n s i t i z i n g the c o l l e g e s ' a d m i n i s t r a t o r s t o the f a c t o r s and c o n d i t i o n s which may have p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e impacts on f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y . Increased awareness by p r o a c t i v e 75 a d m i n i s t r a t o r s s h o u l d l e a d t o a working environment more f a c i l i t a t i v e t o f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y i f e i t h e r f a c i l i t a t i n g i n c i d e n t s are i n c r e a s e d and/or h i n d e r i n g i n c i d e n t s are reduced. More s p e c i f i c a l l y , a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a t both c o l l e g e s s h o u l d p a r t i c u l a r l y note the f a c i l i t a t i v e e f f e c t s o f encouraging and s u p p o r t i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l development i n i t i a t i v e s f o r f a c u l t y . S i m i l a r l y , o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r f a c u l t y t o experience changes i n t h e i r r o l e s appears t o be an e f f e c t i v e instrument t o f a c i l i t a t e p r o d u c t i v i t y . A d m i n i s t r a t o r s a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e and Red Deer C o l l e g e s h o u l d a l s o note the h i n d e r i n g e f f e c t s of l e a d e r s h i p p r a c t i c e s by a d m i n i s t r a t o r s as w e l l as problems a r i s i n g from workloads p e r c e i v e d as e x c e s s i v e , o v e r l y demanding secondary d u t i e s and inadequate f a c i l i t i e s . The p r o d u c t i v i t y f a c t o r assessment s e c t i o n of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e s u l t s suggests a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a t the two c o l l e g e s should be s e n s i t i v e t o any a c t i o n s which are p e r c e i v e d as undermining q u a l i t y of performance. The mean t h a t 'a work environment which supports q u a l i t y ' r e c e i v e d was the h i g h e s t of a l l f a c t o r s e v a l u a t e d (4.72 on a 5-point s c a l e ) and i t a l s o had the lowest standard d e v i a t i o n . L i m i t a t i o n s of T h i s Study 76 The r e s u l t s o f t h i s study a p p l y s p e c i f i c a l l y t o c o n t i n u i n g c o n t r a c t t e a c h i n g f a c u l t y a t F r a s e r V a l l e y C o l l e g e i n B r i t i s h Columbia and Red Deer C o l l e g e i n A l b e r t a . A l t h o u g h these c o l l e g e s may be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of comprehensive r u r a l community c o l l e g e s i n the two r e s p e c t i v e p r o v i n c i a l j u r i s d i c t i o n s , f u t u r e s t u d i e s w i l l be n e c e s s a r y t o determine t h i s and any f u r t h e r g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y . The study was a l s o l i m i t e d t o i n v e s t i g a t i o n o f p r o d u c t i v i t y f a c t o r s i n s t r u c t o r s a s s o c i a t e w i t h t h e i r c o l l e g e work. T h i s was done i n t e n t i o n a l l y s i n c e the purpose of the study was t o i n v e s t i g a t e the impact of the work and i t s environment on f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y . F a c t o r s r e l a t e d t o i n s t r u c t o r s ' p e r s o n a l l i v e s , those i n t r i n s i c i n n a t u r e , and those which are e x t e r n a l but o r i g i n a t e o u t s i d e the c o l l e g e were not e x p l o r e d . T h e r e f o r e , f i n d i n g s from t h i s study cannot be c o n s i d e r e d t o be the o n l y f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g p r o d u c t i v i t y . I t c o u l d not be determined i f the p r o f i l e o f nonrespondents v a r i e d i n any way ot h e r than sex from the p r o f i l e o f respondents. I t should t h e r e f o r e be assumed t h i s study i s l i m i t e d by the p o s s i b i l i t y nonrespondents v a r i e d i n some way from respondents. 77 Recommendations f o r Future Research The f o l l o w i n g recommendations r e s u l t from t h i s r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t . 1. A d d i t i o n a l s t u d i e s are recommended t o determine i f the c a t e g o r y d e s i g n i s v a l i d i n o t h e r community c o l l e g e c o n t e x t s . 2. The r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d i n t h i s r e s e a r c h are g l o b a l i n the sense t h a t the community c o l l e g e s i n v o l v e d were e s s e n t i a l l y t r e a t e d as homogeneous o r g a n i z a t i o n s when i n f a c t d i s t i n c t programming d i f f e r e n c e s e x i s t which may r e s u l t i n areas such as u n i v e r s i t y t r a n s f e r programs having a d i f f e r e n t emphasis c o n c e r n i n g f a c i l i t a t i n g and h i n d e r i n g f a c t o r s than would, f o r example, t e r m i n a l c a r e e r programs. I t i s recommended t h a t f u t u r e s t u d i e s r e c o g n i z e the p o t e n t i a l f o r these d i f f e r e n c e s t o e x i s t and d e s i g n t h e i r methodology a c c o r d i n g l y . 3. I t i s recommended t h a t f u t u r e r e s e a r c h e x p l o r e s the r e l a t i o n s h i p between p r o d u c t i v i t y and the concepts o f job s a t i s f a c t i o n and m o t i v a t i o n . Some i n c i d e n t s r e p o r t e d i n t h i s study, w h i l e l i n k e d t o p r o d u c t i v i t y by the respondents, a l s o appear t o r e l a t e t o job s a t i s f a c t i o n o r m o t i v a t i o n . 4. What i s the r o l e of work r e l a t e d s t i m u l a t i o n i n a f f e c t i n g p r o d u c t i v i t y ? What s t i m u l a t e s f a c u l t y : r o l e change, new o r d i f f e r e n t courses, p r o f e s s i o n a l development, encouragement and/or support by a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and c o l l e a g u e s ? These i s s u e s are recommended as t o p i c s f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h . 5. I t i s a l s o recommended f u t u r e r e s e a r c h e x p l o r e s the impact of support and l e a d e r s h i p by a d m i n i s t r a t o r s on f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y . 79 REFERENCES Andersson, B., & N i l s s o n , S. (1964). S t u d i e s i n the r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y of the c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t t e c h n i q u e . J o u r n a l of A p p l i e d Psychology, 48, 398-403. Baldwin, R. G. (1979). A d u l t and c a r e e r development: What are the i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r f a c u l t y ? In Current Issues i n  Higher E d u c a t i o n : F a c u l t y c a r e e r development, 2, 13-20. Washington, DC: American A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Higher E d u c a t i o n . (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 193 998) Baldwin, R. G. (1983). V a r i e t y and p r o d u c t i v i t y i n f a c u l t y c a r e e r s . In New D i r e c t i o n s f o r Higher E d u c a t i o n : Issues i n  f a c u l t y p e r s o n n e l p o l i c i e s . 41, 63-80. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. Baldwin, R. G. (1985). (Ed.), New D i r e c t i o n s f o r Higher  E d u c a t i o n : I n c e n t i v e s f o r f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y . 51. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. Baldwin, R. G. & Blackburn, R. T. (1981). The academic c a r e e r as a developmental p r o c e s s . J o u r n a l of Higher  E d u c a t i o n . 52, 598-614. B a r d e c k i , M. J . (1984). Wetland c o n s e r v a t i o n p o l i c i e s i n southern O n t a r i o : A D e l p h i approach. G e o g r a p h i c a l  Monographs, 16.. Bess, J . L. (1977). The m o t i v a t i o n t o t e a c h . J o u r n a l o f  Higher E d u c a t i o n , 48. 243-258. Bess, J . L. (1982). U n i v e r s i t y O r g a n i z a t i o n . New York: Human Sci e n c e s P r e s s . Bevan, J . M. (1985). Who has the r o l e of b u i l d i n g i n i n c e n t i v e s ? In R. J . Baldwin (Ed.), New D i r e c t i o n s f o r  Higher E d u c a t i o n : I n c e n t i v e s f o r f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y . 51, 45-58. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. Blackburn, R. T. (1979). Academic c a r e e r s : P a t t e r n s and p o s s i b i l i t i e s . In C urrent Issues i n Higher E d u c a t i o n :  F a c u l t y c a r e e r development, 2, 25-27. Washington, DC: American A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Higher E d u c a t i o n . (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 193 998) Blackburn, R. T. (1988). F a c u l t y c a r e e r development: Theory and p r a c t i c e . In S. M. C l a r k & D. R. Lewis ( E d s . ) , F a c u l t y  v i t a l i t y and i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o d u c t i v i t y (pp. 55-85). New York: Teachers C o l l e g e , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y . 80 Bland, C. & Schmitz, C. C. (1988). F a c u l t y v i t a l i t y on review. J o u r n a l of Higher E d u c a t i o n , 59, 190-224. Boberg, A. L. & Blackburn, R. T. (1983). F a c u l t y work  d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n and t h e i r concern f o r q u a l i t y . (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 232 570) Boyer, C. M. & Lewis, D. R. (1985). M a i n t a i n i n g f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y through o u t s i d e p r o f e s s i o n a l c o n s u l t i n g . In S. M. C l a r k & D. R. Lewis ( E d s . ) , F a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and  i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o d u c t i v i t y (pp. 177-197). New York: Teachers C o l l e g e , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y . Brookes, M. C. T. & German, K. L. (1983). Meeting the  c h a l l e n g e s : Developing f a c u l t y c a r e e r s . (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 232 516) Bumpus, J . F. (1981). Career v i t a l i z a t i o n and s t r e s s among  p r o f e s s o r s : An a t t r i b u t i o n a l model. (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 207 478) Cares, R. C. & Blackburn, R. T. (1978). F a c u l t y s e l f -a c t u a l i z a t i o n : F a c t o r s a f f e c t i n g c a r e e r s u c c e s s . Research  i n Higher E d u c a t i o n , 9_, 123-136. Carnegie C o u n c i l on P o l i c y S t u d i e s i n Higher E d u c a t i o n . (1980). Three thousand f u t u r e s : the next twenty y e a r s f o r  h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n . San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. C e n t r a , J . A. (1978a). Types of f a c u l t y development programs. J o u r n a l of Higher E d u c a t i o n , 49., 151-162. Ce n t r a , J . A., (1978b). Using student assessments t o improve performance and v i t a l i t y . In W. R. K i r s c h l i n g (Ed.), New  D i r e c t i o n s f o r I n s t i t u t i o n a l Research: E v a l u a t i n g f a c u l t y  performance and v i t a l i t y , 20, 31-50. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. C e n t r a , J . A. (1985). M a i n t a i n i n g f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y through f a c u l t y development. In S. M. C l a r k & D. R. Lewis ( E d s . ) , F a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o d u c t i v i t y (pp. 141-156). New York: Teachers C o l l e g e , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y . C l a r k , S. M., Boyer, C. M., & Corcoran, M. (1985). F a c u l t y and i n s t i t u t i o n a l v i t a l i t y i n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n . In S. M. C l a r k & D. R. Lewis ( E d s . ) , F a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and  i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o d u c t i v i t y : C r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s f o r h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n (pp. 3-24). New York: Teachers C o l l e g e , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y . 81 C l a r k , S. M. & D. R. Lewis ( E d s . ) . (1985). F a c u l t y v i t a l i t y  and i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o d u c t i v i t y : C r i t i c a l p e r s p e c t i v e s f o r  h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n . New York: Teachers C o l l e g e , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y . C l a x t o n , C. S. & M u r r e l l , P. H. (1984). Developmental t h e o r y as a guide f o r m a i n t a i n i n g the v i t a l i t y o f c o l l e g e f a c u l t y . In C. M. N. Mehrotra (Ed.), New D i r e c t i o n s f o r  Teaching and L e a r n i n g : Teaching and aging, 19., 29-44. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. Cochran, M. (1985). The f a c i l i t a t i o n and hindrance of  s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y as r e p o r t e d by The U n i v e r s i t y o f  B r i t i s h Columbia E d u c a t i o n F a c u l t y members, Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver. Corcoran, M. & C l a r k , S. M. (1983). Development o f g u i d e l i n e s f o r p o l i c y - r e l e v a n t s t u d i e s of f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y  through an i n s t i t u t i o n a l case study. (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 245 655) Corcoran, M. & C l a r k , S. M. (1985). The 'stuck' p r o f e s s o r . In The p r o f e s s o r i a t e : Occupation i n c r i s i s . Toronto: Higher E d u c a t i o n Group, the O n t a r i o I n s t i t u t e f o r S t u d i e s i n E d u c a t i o n . Delbecq, A. L., Van de Ven, A. H., & Gustafson, D. H. (1975). Group techniques f o r program p l a n n i n g : A guide t o  nominal group and D e l p h i processes• Glenview, I L : S c o t t , Foresman and Company. D i e t z , T. (1987). Methods f o r a n a l y z i n g data from D e l p h i p a n e l s : Some evidence from a f o r e c a s t i n g study. T e c h n o l o g i c a l F o r e c a s t i n g and S o c i a l Change, 31, 70-85. E w e l l , P. (1984). The s e l f - r e g a r d i n g i n s t i t u t i o n : I n f o r m a t i o n f o r e x c e l l e n c e . N a t i o n a l Center f o r Higher E d u c a t i o n Management Systems. Flanagan, J . C. (1954). The c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t t e c h n i q u e . P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , 51, 327-358. F u r n i s s , W. T. (1981). Reshaping f a c u l t y c a r e e r s . Washington, DC: American C o u n c i l on E d u c a t i o n . G a f f , J . G. (1975). Toward f a c u l t y renewal: Advances i n f a c u l t y , i n s t r u c t i o n a l and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l development. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. Gardner, J . W. (1964). S e l f - r e n e w a l . New York: Harper and Row. 82 Gardner, J . W. (1978). Morale. New York: Norton. Gardner, J . W. (1981). Self-Renewal ( r e v . e d . ) . New York: Norton. Goldschmidt, P. G. (1975). S c i e n t i f i c i n q u i r y o r p o l i t i c a l c r i t i q u e ? T e c h n o l o g i c a l F o r e c a s t i n g and S o c i a l Change, 1, 195-213. Group f o r Human Development i n Higher E d u c a t i o n . (1974). F a c u l t y development i n a time of retrenchment. New R o c h e l l e , NY: Change Magazine P r e s s . Hansen, W. L. (1985). Changing demography of f a c u l t y i n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n . In S. M. C l a r k & D. R. Lewis ( E d s . ) , F a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r o d u c t i v i t y : C r i t i c a l  P e r s p e c t i v e s f o r h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n (pp. 27-54). New York: Teachers C o l l e g e , Columbia U n i v e r s i t y , 1985. Kanter, R. M. (1977). Men and women of the c o r p o r a t i o n . New York: B a s i c Books. Kanter, R. M. (1979). Changing the shape of work: Reform i n academe. Current Issues i n Higher E d u c a t i o n , 1, 3-9. Kanter, R. M. (1983). The change masters. New York: Simon and S c h u s t e r . K i r s c h l i n g , W. R. (Ed.). (1978). E v a l u a t i n g f a c u l t y performance and v i t a l i t y . New D i r e c t i o n s f o r I n s t i t u t i o n a l  Research, 20. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. Konrad, A. G. (1985). F a c u l t y development i n Canadian c o l l e g e s . In The p r o f e s s o r i a t e : Occupation i n c r i s i s . T o ronto: Higher E d u c a t i o n Group, The O n t a r i o I n s t i t u t e f o r S t u d i e s i n Ed u c a t i o n . L i n s t o n e , H. A. (1975). E i g h t b a s i c p i t f a l l s : A c h e c k l i s t . In H. A. L i n s t o n e & M. T u r o f f ( E d s . ) , The D e l p h i method:  Techniques and a p p l i c a t i o n s . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. L i n s t o n e , H. A. & T u r o f f , M. (E d s . ) . (1975). The D e l p h i  method: Techniques and a p p l i c a t i o n s . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. L i n d q u i s t , J . (1978). S o c i a l l e a r n i n g and p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g s t r a t e g i e s f o r improving academic performance. In W.R. K i r s c h l i n g (Ed.), New D i r e c t i o n s f o r I n s t i t u t i o n a l  Research: E v a l u a t i n g f a c u l t y performance and v i t a l i t y , 20, 17-30. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. 83 McKeachie, W. J . (1979). P e r c e p t i o n s from psychology: F i n a n c i a l i n c e n t i v e s are i n e f f e c t i v e f o r f a c u l t y . In D. R. Lewis & W. E. Becker ( E d s . ) , Academic rewards i n h i g h e r  e d u c a t i o n (pp.3-20). Cambridge, MA: B a l l i n g e r . McKeachie, W. J . (1983). F a c u l t y as a renewable r e s o u r c e . In R. G. Baldwin & R. T. Blackburn ( E d s . ) , New D i r e c t i o n s f o r  I n s t i t u t i o n a l Research: C o l l e g e f a c u l t y : V e r s a t i l e human  re s o u r c e s i n a p e r i o d of c o n s t r a i n t , 40, 57-66. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. Main, A. (1985). E d u c a t i o n a l s t a f f development. Croom Helm. Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study r e s e a r c h i n e d u c a t i o n : A  Q u a l i t a t i v e approach. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. Newell, L. J . & Spear, K. I. (1983). New dimensions f o r academic c a r e e r s : R e d i s c o v e r i n g i n t r i n s i c s a t i s f a c t i o n s . L i b e r a l E d u c a t i o n . 69. 109-116. Pa t t o n , C. V. (1978). Mid-career change and e a r l y r e t i r e m e n t . In W.R. K i r s c h l i n g (Ed.), New D i r e c t i o n s f o r  I n s t i t u t i o n a l Research: E v a l u a t i n g f a c u l t y performance and  v i t a l i t y . 20, 69-82. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. P e l z , D. C. & Andrews, F. M. (1976). S c i e n t i s t s i n  O r g a n i z a t i o n s (rev. ed.). New York: Wiley. R i e g e r , W. G. (1986). D i r e c t i o n s i n D e l p h i developments: D i s s e r t a t i o n s and t h e i r q u a l i t y . T e c h n o l o g i c a l  F o r e c a s t i n g and S o c i a l Change. 29. 195-204. Sackman, H. (1975). D e l p h i c r i t i q u e : Expert o p i n i o n . f o r e c a s t i n g , and group p r o c e s s . L e x i n g t o n , MA: The Rand C o r p o r a t i o n . Sarason, S. B. (1977). Work, aging, and s o c i a l change:  P r o f e s s i o n a l s and the one l i f e - one c a r e e r i m p e r a t i v e . New York: The Free P r e s s . Schneider, B. & Zalesny, M. (1981). Human Needs and F a c u l t y  M o t i v a t i o n . (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 216 602) Schurr, G. M. (1980). F r e e i n g the 'stuck' and a i d i n g the  t e r m i n a t e d : Expanding the c a r e e r h o r i z o n s of t e n u r e d  c o l l e g e p r o f e s s o r s . (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 195 197) 84 Sc h u s t e r , J . H. (1985). F a c u l t y v i t a l i t y : O b s e r vations from the f i e l d . In R. J . Baldwin (Ed.), New D i r e c t i o n s f o r  Higher E d u c a t i o n : I n c e n t i v e s f o r f a c u l t y v i t a l i t y , 51, 21-32. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. Smith, D. K. (1978). F a c u l t y v i t a l i t y and the management o f u n i v e r s i t y p e r s o n n e l p o l i c i e s . In W.R. K i r s c h l i n g (Ed.), New D i r e c t i o n s f o r I n s t i t u t i o n a l Research: E v a l u a t i n g  f a c u l t y performance and v i t a l i t y , 20, 1-16. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass. S o r c i n e l l i , M. D. (1986). S a b b a t i c a l s and l e a v e s : C r i t i c a l  events i n the c a r e e r s of f a c u l t y . (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 270 014) Thorburn, S. & Blackburn, R. T. (1986). I n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y  g e n e r a l e d u c a t i o n : A method of f a c u l t y development. (ERIC Document Reproduction S e r v i c e No. ED 268 878) Woolsey, L. K. (1986). The c r i t i c a l i n c i d e n t t e c h n i q u e : An i n n o v a t i v e q u a l i t a t i v e method of r e s e a r c h . Canadian  J o u r n a l o f C o u n s e l l i n g . 20, 242-254. 85 APPENDIX A DELPHI GROUP RECRUITMENT LETTERS AND AGREEMENT FORMS Please return to: RESPONSE F O R M PRODUCTIVITY RESEARCH PROJECT 92 Casey Sheridan c/o Fraser Valley College 33844 King Road Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 From: , President College Date: March , 1989 1. Will you permit this productivity research project to be carried out at College? YES NO If YES, then: 2. Please provide the names of 3 college administrators and 3 continuing contract faculty you feel have the expertise, and hopefully the willingness, to participate in a Delphi group to develop a definition of community college faculty productivity. Administrators: Faculty: a. • a. b. b. c. c. 3. Are you willing to participate in the Delphi group? YES NO SIGNED RESPONSE F O R M PRODUCTIVITY RESEARCH PROJECT Please return to: 93 Casey Sheridan c/o Fraser Valley College 33844 King Road Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 From: , President Faculty Association College Date: March , 1989 1. Are you willing to participate in this productivity research project at College? YES NO If YES, then: 2. Please provide the names of 3 college administrators and 3 continuing contract faculty you feel have the expertise, and hopefully the willingness, to participate in a Delphi group to develop a definition of community college faculty productivity. Administrators: Faculty: a. a. b. b. c. c. 3. Are you willing to participate in the Delphi group? YES NO SIGNED RESPONSE F O R M PRODUCTIVITY R E S E A R C H PROJECT Please return to: Casey Sheridan c/o Fraser Valley College 33844 King Road Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 From: ~ F2 ~ F l ~ Fraser Valley College 33844 King Road Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 Date: , 1989 Are you willing to participate in the productivity Delphi group as described in the covering letter? The first round will occur early in May. YES NO SIGNED NEGATIVE RESPONSE F O R M PRODUCTIVITY RESEARCH PROJECT 95 Please return to: Casey Sheridan c/o Fraser Valley College 33844 King Road Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 From: Red Deer College 56 Avenue - 32 Street, Box 5005 Red Deer, Alberta T4N 5H5 Date: , 1989 I am unable to participate in the productivity Delphi group as described in the covering letter. SIGNED 96 APPENDIX B DELPHI GROUP OUTGOING AND INCOMING COMMUNICATION ROUNDS 1-4 ROUND ONE RESPONSE F O R M PRODUCTIVITY R E S E A R C H PROJECT 97 From: Please return to: ~ F 2 ~ F 1 " Casey Sheridan Fraser Valley College c/o Fraser Valley College 33844 King Road 33844 King Road Abbotsford, B.C. Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 V2S 4N2 **************************************** How would you define a productive community college faculty member? Please answer this question by completing the statement below in point form with productivity measures you feel are important. A productive community college faculty member is one who: ROUND ONE RESPONSE F O R M PRODUCTIVITY RESEARCH PROJECT 98 From: Please return by F A X to: ~ F 2 ~ F 1 ~ Casey Sheridan Red Deer College c/o Fraser Valley College 56 Avenue - 32 Street 33844 King Road Red Deer, Alberta Abbotsford, B.C. T4N 5H5 V2S 4N2 ; **************************************** How would you define a productive community college faculty member? Please answer this question by completing the statement below in point form with productivity measures you feel are important. A productive community college faculty member is one who: ROUND TWO RESPONSE FORM CATEGORY ASSIGNMENT 103 A productive community college f a c u l t y member i s one who: 1. C a r r i e s the expected load of i n s t r u c t i o n a l and non i n s t r u c t i o n a l tasks 2 . Is supported with adequate resources 3. Uses these resources e f f i c i e n t l y 4. Contributes to achieving the college's mission and goals 5. Is an e f f e c t i v e i n s t r u c t o r , and i s a c t i v e l y committed to remaining e f f e c t i v e 6. Is student centred, stimulating and helping them to learn and how to l e a r n 7. Updates and rev i s e s courses r e g u l a r l y 8 . P a r t i c i p a t e s i n professional development and renewal a c t i v i t i e s 9. P a r t i c i p a t e s i n the college beyond his/her s p e c i f i c teaching r o l e 10. P a r t i c i p a t e s i n community a c t i v i t i e s 11. Other (none of the above accommodate t h i s p r o d u c t i v i t y measure) Please s e l e c t a category from the above f or each of the p r o d u c t i v i t y measures you reported i n round one as l i s t e d below. Not a l l categories need to be used and a category may be used more than once. ROUND TWO RESPONSE FORM CATEGORY IMPORTANCE 104 The numbered statements below complete the sentence at the top of the l e f t column. For each statement, please c i r c l e the number which  corresponds to the importance you give that statement. A PRODUCTIVE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY MEMBER IS ONE WHO: LOW HIGH IMPORTANCE IMPORTANCE 1. Ca r r i e s the expected load of i n s t r u c t i o n a l and noninstructional tasks 2. Is supported with adequate resources 3. Uses these resources e f f i c i e n t l y 4. Contributes to achieving the college's mission and goals 5. Is an e f f e c t i v e i n s t r u c t o r , and i s a c t i v e l y committed to remaining e f f e c t i v e 6. Is student centred, stimulating and helping them to learn and how to learn 7. Updates and revises courses r e g u l a r l y 8. P a r t i c i p a t e s i n professional development and renewal a c t i v i t i e s 9. P a r t i c i p a t e s i n the college beyond his/her s p e c i f i c teaching r o l e 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 10. P a r t i c i p a t e s i n community a c t i v i t i e s From: ~F2" ~F1" Red Deer College 56 Avenue - 32 Street Red Deer, Alberta T4N 5H5 ******** Please return by FAX t o : Casey Sheridan c/o Fraser V a l l e y College 33844 King Road Abbotsford,' B.C. V2S 4N2' PRODUCTIVITY PROJECT ROUND THREE RESPONSE FORM 106 A.EVALUATION OF CATEGORY IMPORTANCE The numbered statements below, the same as reviewed in Round 2, are collectively intended to provide a concise definition of a productive community college faculty member. For each statement, please c i r c l e the number which corresponds to the importance you place on i t as a measure of community college faculty productivity. An analysis of Round 2 is shown for your information. Also, i f your new response is more than one unit from the average  shown for Round 2, please explain why you consider the statement's importance to be higher or lower than the average response (no comment is needed i f your new response is within one unit of the average). A PRODUCTIVE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY MEMBER IS ONE WHO: 1. carries the expected load of instructional and noninstructional tasks Round 2 Analysis Average Response: 4.42 Low: 2 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .95 Your Response Now Low Importance High Importance 4 5 Comment: i s supported with adequate resources Round 2 Analysis Average Response: 4.55 Your Response: Low: 3 High: 5 Standard Deviation: (1 no response) .66 Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance Comment: uses these resources e f f i c i e n t l y Round 2 Analysis Average Response: 4.25 Low: 3 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .72 Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance Comment: ["Fl"] PRODUCTIVITY PROJECT ROUND THREE RESPONSE FORM 107 contributes to achieving the college's mission and goals Round 2 Analysis Average Response: 4.08 Low: 3 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .76 Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance Comment: 5. i s an effective instructor, and i s actively committed to remaining effective Round 2 Analysis Average Response: 4.75 Low: 4 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .43 Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance Comment: i s student centred, stimulating and helping them to learn and how to learn Round 2 Analysis Average Response: 4.58 Low: 3 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .64 Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance Comment s 7. updates and revises courses regularly Round 2 Analysis Average Response: 4.25 Low: 3 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .60 Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance Comment: [~F1-] PRODUCTIVITY PROJECT ROUND THREE RESPONSE FORM 108 8. participates i n professional development and renewal a c t i v i t i e s Round 2 Analysis Average Response: 4.50 Low: 4 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .50 Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance Comment: 9. participates i n the college beyond his/her specific teaching role Round 2 Analysis Average Response: 4.25 Low: 3 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .60 Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance Comment: 10. participates i n community ac t i v i t i e s Round 2 Analysis Average Response: 3.17 Low: 1 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: 1.07 Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance Comment: ["Fl"] PRODUCTIVITY PROJECT ROUND THREE RESPONSE FORM 109 B.FACTORS RESPONDENTS COULD NOT CATEGORIZE IN ROUND 2 The p a r t i c i p a n t s who o r i g i n a l l y submitted the p r o d u c t i v i t y measures below reported that Round 2 categories d i d not accommodate these p a r t i c u l a r items. For each of these measures please do one of the following: a. assign a category number to i t (use the numbers 1 t o 10 from section A above) i f you f e e l an e x i s t i n g category does accommodate the measure, or b. enter "A" i n the space i f you f e e l the measure i s important enough to be ADDED as a separate category, or c. enter "D" i n the space i f you f e e l the measure i s not important and should be DELETED has a "reasonable" workload as determined by number of sections and numbers of students per section i s healthy, vibrant, v i t a l has a p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e - believes change i s possible and welcome provides a r o l e model for students and colleagues meets other obligations that may be described i n the c o l l e c t i v e agreement or college p o l i c y can manage c o n f l i c t ( i n t e r n a l and external) i n a productive, e f f i c i e n t manner * * * * * * * * From: ~F2" " F l " Fraser V a l l e y College 33844 King Road Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 Please return to: Casey Sheridan c/o Fraser V a l l e y College 33844 King Road Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 ' PRODUCTIVITY PROJECT H I ROUND FOUR RESPONSE FORM EVALUATION OF CATEGORY IMPORTANCE The numbered statements (productivity categories) below, derived from responses to rounds one to three, are intended to collectively provide the basis for a concise, general definition of a productive community college faculty member (institutionally relevant and appropriate measurement c r i t e r i a would be up to each college to develop). As explained i n i t i a l l y in the letter requesting your participation, the definition w i l l be used when faculty are surveyed in the second stage of this research project. The f i n a l definition w i l l consist of those statements the Delphi group considered most important. An analysis of Round 3 responses and participant comments are shown for each statement. This information i s provided to help you re-evaluate your own responses and more fu l l y understand how opinions of the other participants were formed. For each statement, please c i r c l e the number which corresponds to the importance you now place on i t as a measure of community college faculty productivity. A PRODUCTIVE COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY MEMBER IS ONE WHO: 1. carries the expected load of instructional and noninstructional tasks Round 3 Analysis Average Response: 4.50 Low: 3 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .76 Comments Made By Respondents a. To me "productive" means more than carrying the minimum expected load. b. What i s expected could be outlandish. Needs to be compared with expectations and performance of others. c. Begs the question as to who defines "expected." A negotiated version would be rated higher than some others. Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance 1 2 3 4 5 2. i s supported with adequate resources Round 3 Analysis Average Response: 4.17 Low: 1 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: 1.21 Comments Made By Respondents a. Statement doesn't speak to issue - i.e., directly to issue of productivity, rather describes institutional conditions. b. Productive relative to resources. c. "Adequate" is tough to pin down, but i t ' s a c r i t i c a l consideration. d. I s t i l l believe that this i s not a productivity measure. It i s a conditional statement or a prerequisite but not a measure. Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance [~F1~] PRODUCTIVITY PROJECT ROUND FOUR RESPONSE FORM 112 uses these resources e f f i c i e n t l y Round 3 Analysis Average Response: 4.33 Low: 3 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .75 Comments Made By Respondents a. Efficiency in whose terms? Much of educational experimentation, which may result in very effective instruction, may not always appear efficient in terms of resource allocation. b. We a l l know who tends to get to define "e f f i c i e n t l y , " and that their definition rarely includes educational values. Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance 1 2 3 4 5 contributes to achieving the college's mission and goals Round 3 Analysis Average Response: 4.17 Low: 3 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .55 Comments Made By Respondents a. I s t i l l think this i s very open to interpretation - doing one thing, while saying another1 b. Again, there i s the problem of who defines and interprets the college's mission and goals. Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance 1 2 3 4 5 i s an effective instructor, and i s actively committed to remaining effective Round 3 Analysis Average Response: 5.00 Low: 5 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: 0.00 Comments Made By Respondents a. I assume effectiveness w i l l not be measured solely by numbers of students, sections, etc. Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance PRODUCTIVITY PROJECT ROUND FOUR RESPONSE FORM 113 i s student centred, stimulating and helping them to learn and learn how to learn Round 3 Analysis Average Response: 4.67 Low: 3 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .62 Comments Made By Respondents a. Ah, yes, i t ' s so nice to note the importance of students at a college. b. "Student centred" has become a buzz-word for the 80s. It's not clear to me that teaching my discipline needs to be student-centred except in some very precise ways. The concept needs c l a r i f i c a t i o n . Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance 1 2 3 4 5 updates and revises courses regularly Round 3 Analysis Average Response: 4.25 Low: 4 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .43 Comments Made By Respondents a. Redundant to #'s 5 & 6? Perhaps should ask whether applies PD activities to instructional tasks? Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance 1 2 3 4 5 participates i n professional development and renewal a c t i v i t i e s Round 3 Analysis Average Response: 4.50 Low: 4 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .50 Comments Made By Respondents a. Who defines what count as PD and renewal activities? Does i t include, e.g., reading books? Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance PRODUCTIVITY PROJECT ROUND FOUR RESPONSE FORM 114 9•participates in the college beyond his/her specific teaching role Round 3 Analysis Average Response: 4.33 Low: 4 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: .47 Comments Made By Respondents a. Doesn't t h i s overlap with #1 ("noninstructional tasks")? Didn't notice t h i s before. b. There should be room for loners i f they do not c r i p p l e others. Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance 1 2 3 4 5 10. p a r t i c i p a t e s i n community a c t i v i t i e s Round 3 Analysis Average Response: 3.25 Low: 1 High: 5 Your Response: Standard Deviation: 1.01 Comments Made By Respondents a. A t r u l y productive i n s t r u c t o r i n a community college contributes beyond the classroom. They have an important contribution to make to the communities they serve. b. I think you can be productive without t h i s - although of course i t i s us e f u l . Some d i s c i p l i n e s may need to have t h i s ( i . e . , ECD, So c i a l Work, e t c . ) . But an Engli s h i n s t r u c t o r , for example, may not. c. Perhaps I should q u a l i f y t h i s , as I have i n mind community a c t i v i t i e s r e l a t e d to college duties. d. I think t h i s i s i r r e l e v a n t , unless doing so i s a s p e c i f i e d part of the in s t r u c t o r ' s job. A productive f a c u l t y member w i l l influence the students, who w i l l influence the community. He/she doesn't have to go out and do i t personally! Some people are i n c l i n e d to p a r t i c i p a t e while others aren't. Both may be great teachers, or neither may bel e. Nice but not e s s e n t i a l f or everyone. f. In keeping with assigned College r o l e (represents College i n various groups, etc.) Your Response Now Low High Importance Importance 1 2 3 4 5 ******** From: ~F2~ " F l " Fraser V a l l e y College 33844 King Road Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 Please return to: Casey Sheridan c/o Fraser V a l l e y College 33844 King Road Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 "~ Final Results of the Faculty Productivity Delphi Project 1) Carries the expected load of instructional and noninstructional tasks. # FREQ C U M % N O R M % REV% RESPONSE CATEGORY 1 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Low Importance 2 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 2 16.7 16.7 16.7 4 2 33.3 16.7 16.7 5 8 100.0 66.7 66.7 High Importance W A 4.50 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTALS SD .76 2) Is supported with adequate resources. # FREQ C U M % N O R M % REV% RESPONSE CATEGORY 1 1 8.3 8.3 8.3 Low Importance 2 0 8.3 0.0 0.0 3 3 33.3 25.0 25.0 4 3 58.3 25.0 25.0 5 5 100.0 41.7 41.7 High Importance W A 3.92 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTALS SD 1.19 3) Uses these resources efficiently. # FREQ C U M % N O R M % REV% RESPONSE CATEGORY 1 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Low Importance 2 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 3 25.0 25.0 25.0 4 4 58.3 33.3 33.3 5 5 100.0 41.7 41.7 High Importance W A 4.17 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTALS SD .80 4) Contributes to achieving the college's mission and goals. # FREQ C U M % N O R M % REV% RESPONSE CATEGORY 1 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Low Importance 2 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 2 16.7 16.7 16.7 4 7 75.0 58.3 58.3 5 3 100.0 25.0 25.0 High Importance W A 4.08 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTALS SD .64 5) Is an effective instructor, and is actively committed to remaining effective. # FREQ C U M % N O R M % REV% RESPONSE CATEGORY 1 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Low Importance 2 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 High Importance W A 5.00 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTALS SD .00 6) Is student centred, stimulating and helping them to learn and learn how to learn. # FREQ C U M % N O R M % REV% RESPONSE CATEGORY 1 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Low Importance 2 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 1 8.3 8.3 8.3 4 2 25.0 16.7 16.7 5 9 100.0 75.0 75.0 High Importance W A 4.67 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTALS SD .62 7) Updates and revises courses regularly. # FREQ C U M % N O R M % REV% RESPONSE CATEGORY 1 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Low Importance 2 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 1 8.3 8.3 8.3 4 8 75.0 66.7 66.7 5 3 100.0 25.0 25.0 High Importance W A 4.17 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTALS SD .55 8) Participates in professional development and renewal activities. # FREQ C U M % N O R M % REV% RESPONSE CATEGORY 1 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Low Importance 2 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4 5 41.7 41.7 41.7 5 7 100.0 58.3 58.3 High Importance W A 4.58 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTALS SD .49 118 9) Participates in the college beyond his/her specific teaching role. # FREQ CUM.% N O R M % REV% RESPONSE CATEGORY 1 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Low Importance 2 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 1 8.3 8.3 8.3 4 8 75.0 66.7 66.7 5 3 100.0 25.0 25.0 High Importance W A 4.17 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTALS SD .55 10) Participates in community activities. # FREQ C U M % N O R M % REV% RESPONSE CATEGORY 1 1 8.3 8.3 8.3 Low Importance 2 2 25.0 16.7 16.7 3 4 58.3 33.3 33.3 4 4 91.7 33.3 33.3 5 1 100.0 8.3 8.3 High Importance W A 3.17 12 100.0 100.0 100.0 TOTALS SD 1.07 ******** Based on the results of this Delphi process the following definition will be used in the survey of faculty: Representatives from faculty and administration at each college being surveyed participated in development of a faculty productivity definition for use in this questionnaire. The statements below are collectively intended to provide a concise, general definition of a  productive community college faculty member (institutionally relevant and appropriate  measurement criteria would be up to each college to develop). A productive community college faculty member is one who: 1. is an effective instructor, and is actively committed to remaining effective 2. is student centred, stimulating and helping them to learn and learn how to learn 3. participates in professional development and renewal activities 4. carries the expected load of instructional and noninstructional tasks 5. updates and revises courses regularly 6. participates in the college beyond his/her specific teaching role 7. uses resources efficiently 8. contributes to achieving the college's mission and goals APPENDIX C LETTER REQUESTING PARTICIPATION IN PILOT SURVEY 121 APPENDIX D QUESTIONNAIRES, COVERING LETTERS AND FOLLOW-UP LETTERS FACULTY PRODUCTIVITY QUESTIONNAIRE ( College) 126 INSTRUCTIONS There are three parts to t h i s questionnaire: * PART I asks a few personal questions i n order to develop a p r o f i l e of the respondents. * PART II gathers data about work r e l a t e d incidents which were personally s i g n i f i c a n t i n e i t h e r f a c i l i t a t i n g or hindering your p r o d u c t i v i t y . * PART III provides a l i s t of factors which you are asked t o r e l a t e to your p r o d u c t i v i t y . The f i r s t and t h i r d parts w i l l only take a few minutes to complete. PART I I , however, requires you to r e c a l l d e t a i l s about s p e c i f i c occurrences and consequently w i l l take a l i t t l e longer. T o t a l time required i s approximately 10 minutes. Please answer a l l the questions i n the sequence provided and return the completed survey i n the enclosed envelope. The data c o l l e c t e d by t h i s survey w i l l be used f o r academic research purposes. Individual responses are anonymous and w i l l be aggregated with r e p l i e s from others surveyed. Information w i l l not be released i n any way which would permit i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a respondent. ******** DEFINITION OF PRODUCTIVITY Representatives from f a c u l t y and administration at each c o l l e g e being surveyed p a r t i c i p a t e d i n development of a f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y d e f i n i t i o n f o r use i n t h i s questionnaire. The statements below are c o l l e c t i v e l y intended to provide a concise, general d e f i n i t i o n of a  productive community college f a c u l t y member ( i n s t i t u t i o n a l l y relevant  and appropriate measurement c r i t e r i a would be up to each c o l l e g e to  develop). A productive community c o l l e g e f a c u l t y member i s one who: 1. i s an e f f e c t i v e i n s t r u c t o r , and i s a c t i v e l y committed t o remaining e f f e c t i v e 2. i s student centred, stimulating and helping them t o l e a r n and l e a r n how t o l e a r n 3. p a r t i c i p a t e s i n p r o f e s s i o n a l development and renewal a c t i v i t i e s 4. c a r r i e s the expected load of i n s t r u c t i o n a l and n o n i n s t r u c t i o n a l tasks 5. updates and r e v i s e s courses r e g u l a r l y 6 . p a r t i c i p a t e s i n the c o l l e g e beyond his/her s p e c i f i c teaching r o l e 7. uses resources e f f i c i e n t l y 8. contributes t o achieving the c o l l e g e ' s mission and goals Factors Reported By Instructors As A f f e c t i n g Their P r o d u c t i v i t y 127 PART I: PERSONAL PROFILE FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Please check the appropriate response for each of the C O D E following statements and questions. 1 2 3 4 1. Sex 5 (1) Male (2) Female 2. Age at l a s t birthday 6-7 (1) < 26 (6) 46-50 (2) 26-30 (7) 51-55 (3) 31-35 (8) 56-60 (4) 36-40 (9) 61-65 (5) 41-45 (10) > 65 3. Your current main teaching area i s best described as 8 ( s e l e c t one o n l y ) : (1) Career/vocational/trades programs (2) U n i v e r s i t y transfer/academic programs (3) College preparatory/developmental programs 4. Your current college p o s i t i o n i s best described as 9 ( s e l e c t one only): (1) Sessional (temporary contract) i n s t r u c t o r (2) Part-time continuing contract i n s t r u c t o r (3) Full-time continuing contract i n s t r u c t o r with no time release for other re spons i b i 1 i t i e s (4) Full-time continuing contract i n s t r u c t o r with some time release for other r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s (5) F u l l - t i m e continuing contract i n s t r u c t o r with f u l l time release for other r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s 5. How long have you been an i n s t r u c t o r at t h i s college? 10 (1) < 6 years (4) 16-20 years (2) 6-10 years (5) 21-25 years (3) 11-15 years (6) > 25 years ******** PART I I : PRODUCTIVITY FACTOR IDENTIFICATION The purpose of the questions which follow i s to obtain from you a number of incidents which you f e e l were personal l y s i g n i f i c a n t i n f a c i l i t a t i n g or hindering your p r o d u c t i v i t y . An incident i s any occurrence, event or happening at a point i n time, re c u r r e n t l y over time, or continuously over a period of time. For example, r e c e i v i n g recognition or being unable to obtain a required p u b l i c a t i o n at the college l i b r a r y are incidents at a point i n time. Crowded classroom space i n a course you teach or p a r t i c i p a t i o n on a c o l l e g e committee are examples of recurrent i n c i d e n t s . A sabbatical or secondment would be considered an Factors Reported By Instructors As A f f e c t i n g Their P r o d u c t i v i t y 128 incident continuous i n nature. For purposes of these questions the incident i s considered personally s i g n i f i c a n t i f i t had a notable e f f e c t i n e i t h e r f a c i l i t a t i n g or hindering your p r o d u c t i v i t y . A. F a c i l i t a t i n g Incidents C O D E 6. Please think back to the l a s t time a personally s i g n i f i c a n t incident occurred at the college which f a c i l i t a t e d your p r o d u c t i v i t y . (1) Describe the incident 11-12 (2) How d i d t h i s incident f a c i l i t a t e your 13-14 prod u c t i v i t y ? Can you think of another personally s i g n i f i c a n t i n cident at the college which f a c i l i t a t e d your pr o d u c t i v i t y ? (1) Describe the incident 15-16 (2) How d i d t h i s incident f a c i l i t a t e your 17-18 produ c t i v i t y ? C O D E Factors Reported By Instructors As A f f e c t i n g Their P r o d u c t i v i t y 129 B. Hindering Incidents 8. Please think back to the l a s t time a personally s i g n i f i c a n t incident occurred at the college which hindered your p r o d u c t i v i t y . (1) Describe the incident 19-20 (2) How d i d t h i s incident hinder your productivity? 21-22 9. Can you think of another personally s i g n i f i c a n t i n cident at the college which hindered your p r o d u c t i v i t y ? (1) Describe the incident 23-24 (2) How d i d t h i s incident hinder your productivity? 25-26 * * * * * * * * Factors Reported By Instructors As A f f e c t i n g Their P r o d u c t i v i t y 130 PART II I ! PRODUCTIVITY FACTOR ASSESSMENT The following statements r e f l e c t work r e l a t e d factors which may a f f e c t community college f a c u l t y p r o d u c t i v i t y . Please c i r c l e the number which  corresponds to your perception of the p r i o r i t y the  fa c t o r has i n a f f e c t i n g your p r o d u c t i v i t y . WORK RELATED FACTORS AND YOUR PRODUCTIVITY 10. appropriate l i b r a r y holdings 11. adequate laboratory space 12. contemporary laboratory equipment 13. opportunities to attend p r o f e s s i o n a l meetings 14. opportunities f o r sabbatical leaves 15. stimulation of good students 16. a manageable work load 17. adequate compensation 18. recogn i t i o n by administration 19. appreciation by administration 20. c l e a r i n s t i t u t i o n a l objectives 21. c l e a r i n s t i t u t i o n a l p r i o r i t i e s 22. meaningful f a c u l t y p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n governance 23. openness i n d e c i s i o n making 24. f a i r n e s s i n de c i s i o n making 25. i n t e l l e c t u a l freedom 26. stimulation of colleagues 27. opportunities f o r career growth 28. opportunities f o r h i e r a r c h i c a l advancement LOW PRIORITY 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 HIGH PRIORITY 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY C O D E 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 Factors Reported By Instructors As A f f e c t i n g Their P r o d u c t i v i t y 131 WORK RELATED FACTORS AND YOUR LOW HIGH C O D E PRODUCTIVITY PRIORITY PRIORITY 29. stimulating work 1 2 3 4 5 46 30. s a t i s f y i n g work 1 2 3 4 5 47 31. f u l f i l l i n g work 1 2 3 4 5 48 32. opportunities to learn new 1 2 3 4 5 49 things 33. opportunities to take on new 1 2 3 4 5 50 challenges 34. opportunities to take on new 1 2 3 4 5 51 r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s 35. opportunities f o r outside 1 2 3 4 5 52 pro f e s s i o n a l consulting 36. opportunities to teach 1 2 3 4 5 53 i n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y courses 37. opportunities f o r 1 2 3 4 5 54 i n s t r u c t i o n a l development 38. opportunities f o r professional 1 2 3 4 5 55 development 39. a co l l e g e environment that i s 1 2 3 4 5 56 f l e x i b l e 40. an informal work environment 1 2 3 4 5 57 41. a work environment which 1 2 3 4 5 58 supports q u a l i t y 42. opportunities to teach 1 2 3 4 5 59 d i f f e r e n t courses 43. opportunities to teach new 1 2 3 4 5 60 courses 44. opportunities f o r temporary 1 2 3 4 5 61 nonacademic assignments Thank you very much f o r taking time to respond. Return the questionnaire i n the addressed envelope provided or t o : Casey Sheridan c/o Fraser V a l l e y College 33844 King Road, R.R. #2 Abbotsford, B.C. V2S 4N2 

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:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0055838/manifest

Comment

Related Items