Date of Award

6-1994

Degree Name

Doctor of Education

Department

Educational Leadership, Research and Technology

First Advisor

Dr. Uldis Smidchens

Second Advisor

Dr. Charles Warfield

Third Advisor

Dr. Mary-Ann Bowman

Fourth Advisor

Dr. Martha Warfield

Abstract

The purposes of this study were to determine (a) the importance and frequency of offering of personal, instructional, curriculum, research, academic advising, and organizational development programs in universities and colleges in the United States; and (b) the types and times of evaluation of faculty development practices. Types of evaluation studied included measuring participant satisfaction, participant learning, on the- job behavior, and organizational effects. Times of evaluation included during the implementation of the practice, evaluation immediately after the implementation, and evaluation a month or more after the implementation.

A sample of 195 faculty developers from research, doctorate-granting, and comprehensive universities, and liberal arts colleges was randomly selected for this study. Data were collected through the Survey of Faculty Development Program Evaluation. One hundred thirty-five subjects returned the survey (69.2%).

Findings indicate that research and doctorate-granting universities consider instructional and research development programs to be of equal importance. However, research universities offer instructional development programs most frequently, while doctorate-granting universities offer organizational development programs most frequently. Comprehensive universities consider instructional and curriculum development programs to be of equal importance but offer personal development programs most frequently. Liberal arts colleges consider academic advising and instructional development programs to be of equal importance and offer instructional development programs most frequently.

Findings indicate no difference among institutions in relation to (a) the importance and frequency of offering of personal, curriculum, and organizational development programs; (b) the importance of instructional development programs; and (c) the frequency of offering of academic advising development programs. Differences were found among universities and colleges in relation to (a) the frequency of offering of instructional development programs; (b) the importance and frequency of offering of research development programs; and (c) the importance of academic advising development programs.

Findings indicate that universities and colleges evaluate faculty development practices by measuring (a) participant satisfaction, (b) the effects of the practices on the organization, (c) on-the-job behaviors, and (d) participant learning. Evaluation of faculty development practices is most often based on participant satisfaction; evaluation is done usually at the end of the implementation of the faculty development practice.

Access Setting

Dissertation-Open Access

Share

COinS