Doctoral Dissertations
Date of Award
8-1983
Degree Type
Dissertation
Degree Name
Doctor of Education
Major Professor
George A. Wagoner
Committee Members
George Wiegers, Ken McCullough, M. L. Townsend
Abstract
The problem of this study was to describe a variety of exemplary staff development programs which were being used in community colleges in the Southeastern United States and to develop a staff development model.
A checklist and telephone interview guide were developed for use in collecting the data. The checklist was completed by forty community/junior colleges which had been identified as having good staff development programs. One college from each of the fourteen southeastern states was selected for the telephone interview.
The major findings of this study were;
1. The size of the community/junior college was not a determining factor in whether the college was considered to have a "good" staff development program.
2. The majority of colleges make staff development the primary responsibilities of the chief academic administrators.
3. Most of the staff development programs included in the study had been in existence ten years or less.
4. Most of the colleges were spending one percent or less of their college's operating budget for staff development.
5. The amount budgeted for staff development activities ranged from less than $50 to more than $600 for each full-time employee, with a mean of $179. The average amount spent for each full-time professional employee was $312.41.
6. Large community college staff development budgets were effected less by budget cuts than the staff development budgets of small colleges.
7. With the exception of student and supervisor evaluations, very few colleges were involving part-time faculty members in staff development activities.
8. All colleges interviewed reported using their own staff to present some programs. Staff members rarely received additional compensation for these activities.
9. The majority of colleges interviewed had a staff development committee to plan activities and give direction to 6. 7. 8. 9. programs.
10. Although the majority of colleges interviewed reported that involvement in staff development activities was one of the areas on which faculty members were evaluated, few clearly outlined reward systems were found which adequately recognized participation in staff development.
11. The majority of colleges interviewed did not have a comprehensive system of evaluating staff development programs.
12. Almost all colleges had felt the effects of state or federal cuts in funding for higher education.
Recommended Citation
Honaker, Evelyn Joyce, "Outstanding community/junior college staff development programs in the Southeastern United States. " PhD diss., University of Tennessee, 1983.
https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_graddiss/13074