View in EDS

Deans of Instruction and Faculty Development in Four Small Rural Junior Colleges in Texas.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Deans of Instruction and Faculty Development in Four Small Rural Junior Colleges in Texas.
Authors: Golemon, R. B.
Peer Reviewed: N
Page Count: 31
Publication Date: 2025
Document Type: Reports - Research
Descriptors: Academic Deans, Administrator Attitudes, Administrator Role, College Faculty, Community Colleges, Deans, Evaluation Methods, Faculty Evaluation, Higher Education, Inservice Education, Rural Schools, School Surveys, Staff Development, Teacher Attitudes, Two Year Colleges, Urban Schools
Geographic Terms: Texas
Abstract: Four deans of instruction in small, rural junior colleges and four deans of instruction in large, urban junior colleges were interviewed, and faculty members from the small junior colleges were surveyed, in order to ascertain their opinions regarding faculty development procedures. It was found that: (1) deans felt in-service workshops to be essential while faculty were generally unconvinced as to the usefulness of such workshops; (2) consultants were felt to be useful by both deans and faculty; (3) varying methods of faculty evaluation were used, and in the small colleges the deans played a personal role in the evaluation process while in the large colleges where evaluation procedures were more systematic the deans' role was less important; (4) deans in small colleges tended to favor faculty exchange programs while deans in large colleges had reservations as to the utility of such a practice; (5) tangible recognition for teaching excellence or outstanding service was almost unanimously approved by both faculty and deans; (6) faculty and deans approved of community involvement/service as a means of faculty development; and (7) overall, while there was no great difference in the opinions of faculty members and deans' perceptions as to the deans' role in the faculty development process, there seemed to be a nominal breakdown in communications resulting in some unnecessary misunderstandings. An extensive bibliography and the survey instruments are appended. (JDS)
Accession Number: ED133037
Database: ERIC
FullText Text:
  Availability: 0
CustomLinks:
  – Url: https://eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED133037
    Name: ERIC Full Text
    Category: fullText
    Text: Full Text from ERIC
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: ED133037
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Report
PubTypeId: report
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Deans of Instruction and Faculty Development in Four Small Rural Junior Colleges in Texas.
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Golemon%2C+R%2E+B%2E%22">Golemon, R. B.</searchLink>
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: N
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 31
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2025
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Reports - Research
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Deans%22">Academic Deans</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Administrator+Attitudes%22">Administrator Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Administrator+Role%22">Administrator Role</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Faculty%22">College Faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Community+Colleges%22">Community Colleges</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Deans%22">Deans</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Evaluation+Methods%22">Evaluation Methods</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Faculty+Evaluation%22">Faculty Evaluation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Inservice+Education%22">Inservice Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Rural+Schools%22">Rural Schools</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22School+Surveys%22">School Surveys</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Staff+Development%22">Staff Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Attitudes%22">Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Two+Year+Colleges%22">Two Year Colleges</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Urban+Schools%22">Urban Schools</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Texas%22">Texas</searchLink>
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Four deans of instruction in small, rural junior colleges and four deans of instruction in large, urban junior colleges were interviewed, and faculty members from the small junior colleges were surveyed, in order to ascertain their opinions regarding faculty development procedures. It was found that: (1) deans felt in-service workshops to be essential while faculty were generally unconvinced as to the usefulness of such workshops; (2) consultants were felt to be useful by both deans and faculty; (3) varying methods of faculty evaluation were used, and in the small colleges the deans played a personal role in the evaluation process while in the large colleges where evaluation procedures were more systematic the deans' role was less important; (4) deans in small colleges tended to favor faculty exchange programs while deans in large colleges had reservations as to the utility of such a practice; (5) tangible recognition for teaching excellence or outstanding service was almost unanimously approved by both faculty and deans; (6) faculty and deans approved of community involvement/service as a means of faculty development; and (7) overall, while there was no great difference in the opinions of faculty members and deans' perceptions as to the deans' role in the faculty development process, there seemed to be a nominal breakdown in communications resulting in some unnecessary misunderstandings. An extensive bibliography and the survey instruments are appended. (JDS)
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: ED133037
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=ED133037
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 31
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Academic Deans
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Administrator Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Administrator Role
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College Faculty
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Community Colleges
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Deans
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Evaluation Methods
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Faculty Evaluation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Higher Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Inservice Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Rural Schools
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: School Surveys
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Staff Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Attitudes
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Two Year Colleges
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Urban Schools
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Texas
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Deans of Instruction and Faculty Development in Four Small Rural Junior Colleges in Texas.
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Golemon, R. B.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 12
              Type: published
              Y: 2025
ResultId 1