EAD 863 Training and Professional Development

1. EAD 863 Training and Professional Development A CASE STUDY By: Joshua Kuhlmann, David Bull, and Valerie Romeo

2. Here comes your footer  Page 2

3. BACKGROUND McState Community College, one of the larger community colleges in its state, employs nearly 250 full-time faculty members, and at least twice as many part-time, for its 12,000 student population. Many of the full-time staff teach overloads, in excess of 15 credit hours, to help increase their salaries. Recently, the administration suggested that faculty needs to consider ways to improve teaching because an unacceptable number of students are struggling in programs, which they attribute to teachers not effectively engaging students. A creative and innovative approach to faculty development was designed and implemented based on the concept of faculty learning communities. In this program, faculty were given considerable say in determing the topics they wished to explore. Over the course of three years, faculty participation in the program declined significantly, with only the “usual suspects“ in attendance. Additionally, the deans of the various departments noted that little had changed in the wa of the college‘s overall orientation to actively engaging students in their learning and shut the program down... Joshua Kuhlmann, David Bull, Valerie Romeo

4. ISSUES PRESENT Overarching Concerns • An unacceptable number of students are withdrawing or discontinuing lecture attendance. • Administrators believe that faculty members are not effectively engaging students. The Problem • The structure, organization, and base assumptions of factors contributing to students’ poor performance, which the concept of faculty learning communities, at McState Community College, are founded upon. Joshua Kuhlmann, David Bull, Valerie Romeo

5. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS #1: Flexibility and Lack of Structure in the Faculty Learning Communities • Evidence from the case study: “In this program, faculty were given a considerable say in determining the kinds of topics they wanted to pursue and how they would study them within the context of their own teaching.” • As a result, no actual learning occurs for the faculty members involved because they are grounded in their own interests and not forced to challenge the basic beliefs and assumptions guiding their teaching, thus nothing changes. • Patricia Cranton, professor of education at Brock University whose research focus is on the evaluation of teaching higher education, shares that: "It is only when a revision of basic assumptions, beliefs, or a perspective on education takes place that a transformation has occurred.  If the process of reflection leads to an awareness of an invalid, undeveloped, or distorted meaning scheme or perspective; if that scheme or perspective is then revised; and if the educator acts on the revised belief, the development has been transformative" (Cranton113). Joshua Kuhlmann, David Bull, Valerie Romeo

6. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS #2: Faculty Participation is Not a Mandatory Requirement • Evidence from the case study: “One administrator wryly noted that the ‘usual suspects’ were again signing up … [In the third year] many of the teachers from the previous two years enrolled again and the number of new teachers participating was relatively small.” • Since the learning communities were not required for all teaching staff, the ones that needed it most did not participate. Rather, it was the ones who enjoyed this kind of opportunity that continued to sign-up. • Mel Silberman, professor emeritus of adult organizational development at Temple University, shares that: • “Learning is not an automatic consequence of pouring information into another person’s head. It requires the learner’s own mental involvement and doing” (Silberman 1). Therefore, because only the ‘usual suspects’ participated, the faculty members who needed this opportunity, never learned because they never engaged in it. Joshua Kuhlmann, David Bull, Valerie Romeo

7. CONTRIBUTING FACTORS #3: Lack of Performance Incentives, Clear Expectations, and Evaluation • Evidence from the case study: Nowhere is it suggested that faculty receive some benefit for an increase in their performance. Expectations are not set; faculty can investigate “the kinds of topics they wanted to pursue.” And, it does not indicate that their progress in the program is being evaluated. • The ambiguity, lack of incentives, and absence of feedback fails to motivate faculty members to participate in the program. • Sherry Crow shares that: • “Intrinsic motivation stems from the self and causes actions that are stimulated by interest, enjoyment, curiosity, or pleasure … Non-action is caused by the lack of value for the activity” (Crow 26). Thus, it can be deduce that the ‘usual suspects’ are intrinsically motivated, while the faculty members who may need this opportunity, do not find value in it. Joshua Kuhlmann, David Bull, Valerie Romeo

8. RECOMMENDATIONS #1: Mandate Faculty Participation in the Program • In order to achieve maximum participation, and address the problem head on, it will be necessary to require all hired faculty members to participate in the program. #2: Restructure the Program Using the ADDIE Approach • ADDIE – Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluated. • “Instructional design is characterized as learner centered, goal oriented, focusing on meaningful performance, assuming that outcomes can be measured, procedures are base on empirical evidence, interactive, self-correcting, and typically a team effort. Therefore [the faculty] and their performance are the focal point” (Branch 10). • “The key to effective training is how the learning activities are designed so that the participants acquire knowledge and skill rather than receive them” (Silberman 1). Joshua Kuhlmann, David Bull, Valerie Romeo

9. RECOMMENDATIONS #3: Establish Teaching Competency as the Goal of the Program • “Teacher quality or performance competency is a primary driver of student achievement” (Heneman 115). #4: Define a Method for Faculty Evaluation and Reflection in the Program • Evaluating faculty progress will serve to inform their work (Gallagher 44). • Encouraging reflection can lead to a revision in underlying assumptions and beliefs held by the faculty of their teaching. • “When critical reflection leads to a revision in meaning schemes or perspectives, and when a person acts on the changed view, transformative learning has taken place” (Cranton 132). Joshua Kuhlmann, David Bull, Valerie Romeo

10. RECOMMENDATIONS #5: Instill Some Form of Performance Incentives • Since an increase in student achievement is the goal of this program, it is important to positively reinforce successful faculty members in order to habituate their accomplishments in the classroom. • “With time and healthy social context, [faculty members will] begin to assimilate behaviors to themselves so as to become more autonomous and eventually develop intrinsic motivation” (Crow 27). #6: Monitor Progress of Faculty and Students • This last recommendation is imperative to the continual success of the program. As issues arise, it will be necessary to address them and revamp strategies as needed. Joshua Kuhlmann, David Bull, Valerie Romeo

11. CONCLUSION With this new approach to Faculty Learning Communities, we believe that faculty members will be able to take to diversify their teaching strategies in order to bolster student achievement and diminish high withdrawal rates at McState Community College. Joshua Kuhlmann, David Bull, Valerie Romeo