This item is only available as the following downloads:
1 PERCEPTIONS AND EXPERIENCES OF THE SOCIALIZATION PROCESSES AMONG EARLY CAREER FOREIGN NATIONAL TENURE ACCRUING FACULTY IN A RESEARCH I UNIVERSITY By MUEEN AIZAZ ZAFAR A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011
2 2011 Mueen Aizaz Zafar
3 This work is dedicated to my mother, brothers, and si sters for making it possible for me to get this far despite losing my father so early in lifeand to my dear brother Choteyjan whom I lost during my PhD
4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I bow my head in gratitude and humility for having achieved this degree which onl y a few years ago I had all but written off as one life dream too many. It clearly is my finest accomplishment to date and would not have been possible without so many people who helped and supported me every step of the way. I would first of all like to thank my chair Dr. Linda Behar Horenstein. I consider it my profound privilege, good fortune and a special honor to have had her as my adviser. It was a treat to be part of her classes, and I took every single one offered. Her guidance and superior advice gave direction and structure to my dissertation. With so much on her hands she was amazingly patient and accessible throughout my PhD program. Getting this degree would not have been such a joy had it not been for her. My sincere thanks also go to my committee members for providing me wonderful guidance throughout my dissertation. Dr. Maria Coady and Dr. Dale Campbell also gave me their time, special guidance, and support at the time of my admission for which I will always feel hugely indebted. Dr. Wes t Olatunji w as always extremely helpful and a great source of encouragement. Even if I do not turn out as another Freire, I will certainly try to hold up my name better if only for her. My special thanks also go out to Dr. Bernard Oliver for graciously agr eeing to sit in for Dr. Campbell at the last minute. I would also like to thank Dr. Pilar Mendoza for her kind support that she offered on numerous occasions. The faculty and staff at the College of Education were extremely encouraging and helpful throughout my studies. My special thanks go to Dr. Linda Serra Hagedorn and Dr. Kathy Gratto for having faith in me and welcoming me into the PhD program. I would also like to thank Dr. Rodman Webb for his guidance and mesmerizing magic in class. My sincere grat itude go to Dr. Jean Crockett for her kindness, and the wonderful course that she taught us on Special education.
5 My special thanks go to Angela Rowe; without her timely support at critical times, none of us will ever go anywhere. I was very fortunate to have come across some special colleagues and friends during my studies. Kellie Roberts has been a wonderful friend, colleague and research partner. As I write this acknowledgement from the other side of the globe she is my lifeline in Gainesville, and my only hope that this submission gets to the EDT in time today. It was great to have Zaria Malcolms friendship and intellectual influence during my studies. It was wonderful to see her pursue cricket with the same passion and zeal. Sharing the office with her, Alee Gunderson, Lian Niu, and Nancy Parish was a special joy. Thanks are also due to the FJEAP team. It was wonderful to be part of our joint sessions, and have that special evening at Dr. B Hs. I was also blessed with many friends from the Departmen t of Housing and Residence Education where I worked part time for all these years. Thomas Germain, Rena Buchan, Marah, Abdellatif, Devin, Charlotte, Arun, James, Gerardo, Pato, Claudia, Rosana, and Swapnil are some of the special people I met there, will r emember forever, and hope to meet again. A very special thank you to Debra Anderson for being so wonderful, selfless, and full of support to all international students. My special thanks go to my family especially my mother for her prayers and wonderful support. Despite her health problems she made me focus fully on my studies and did not let me come visit her in the final year of program for the fear that I delay completion. My brothers and sisters and their extended families remained a great source of support and inspiration throughout. I wish to express my special gratitude to my in laws for their support, love, and prayers during my studies. I would like to thank my wife Aliya for being such a supportive companion in my classes and at home, and my ch ildren Sana, Sarah, and Ameen for their amazing company; chup
6 chup ke movie nights; and for keeping us both in good humor while we were working furiously on our dissertations. I would be doing a grave injustice if I do not mention Rabia Zafar who was lik e a sixth member of the Zafar family and to Omer Shahid who helped us settle to the ways of life in Gainesville I would like to express my special gratitude to six wonderful individuals, my research partners, who made this study possible. While I cannot name them here on account of confidentiality, I wish them the very best in their mid term reviews tenure, and promotion evaluations. Last but not the least my special thanks go to Faeyza Mufti for helping me on technical matters such as the graphic representation of the model and formatting of the tables as per university guidelines.
7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................................4 LIST OF TABLES .........................................................................................................................10 LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................11 ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................................12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................13 Purpose of the Study ...............................................................................................................16 Research Questions .................................................................................................................16 Definition of Terms ................................................................................................................17 Significance of Study ..............................................................................................................18 Limitations ..............................................................................................................................19 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................................................................20 Tenure Expectations and Workload ........................................................................................20 Becoming Enculturated into the Academy ......................................................................20 M id point Review ............................................................................................................22 Workload Expectations ...................................................................................................22 How Professors Use Assigned Time ...............................................................................23 Teaching ...................................................................................................................28 Research ...................................................................................................................28 Service ......................................................................................................................31 Race, Gender, and Family Status ............................................................................................32 Race and Gender Differences ..........................................................................................32 Family Status ...................................................................................................................35 Unspoken Expectations, Contradictions and Stressors ...........................................................35 Unspoken Expectations ...................................................................................................35 Contradictions and Stressors ...........................................................................................37 Institutional Support and Strategies for Success ....................................................................39 Institutional Support ........................................................................................................39 Recommended Support ...................................................................................................40 Strategies for Success ......................................................................................................41 Theoretical Framework ...........................................................................................................42 Summary .................................................................................................................................45
8 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...........................................................................................47 Epistemology and Theoretical Perspective .............................................................................47 The Setting ..............................................................................................................................48 Participants and Gaining Access ............................................................................................48 Subjectivity .............................................................................................................................49 Data Collection .......................................................................................................................50 Data Analysis ..........................................................................................................................52 4 RESEARCH FINDINGS ........................................................................................................57 Themes ....................................................................................................................................57 Research Question 1. How do early career foreign national faculty perceive the socialization processes in Research I universities? .............................................................59 Choosing Professoriate ....................................................................................................59 Selecting the Research I University ................................................................................61 Socialization Process in the University, College, and Department .................................63 University .................................................................................................................63 College .....................................................................................................................64 Department ...............................................................................................................65 Faculty Socialization Perceptions ....................................................................................68 Research Question 1A. What are early career foreign national facult y perceptions of the expectation of teaching? ......................................................................................................71 Information and Communication on Teaching ................................................................72 Factors Influencing Time Spent on Teaching .................................................................73 Research Question 1B. What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of research? ......................................................................................................76 Information and Communication on Research ................................................................76 Factors Influencing Time Spent on Research ..................................................................78 Research Question 1C. What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of service? ........................................................................................................80 Information and Communication on Service ..................................................................80 Factor s Influencing Time Spent on Service ....................................................................82 Research Question 1D. What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of unspoken expectations? .......................................................................................................83 Unspoken or Unclear Expectations .................................................................................83 Stated Policies & Personal Experiences ..........................................................................85 Faculty Evaluations .........................................................................................................87 Summary .................................................................................................................................89 5 DISCUSSION .........................................................................................................................95 Research Question 1: How do early career fo reign national faculty perceive the socialization processes in Research I universities? .............................................................95 Enculturation into the U.S. and the Academy .................................................................95 Race, Gender and Language ............................................................................................97
9 Family Concerns ............................................................................................................100 Institutional Socialization ..............................................................................................102 Departmental Support ....................................................................................................103 Research Question 1A) What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of teaching in Research I Universities? .........................................................104 Research Question 1B) What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of research in Research I Universities? .........................................................105 Research Question 1C) What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of service in Research I Universities? ...........................................................106 Research Question 1D) What ar e early career foreign national faculty perceptions of unspoken expectations in Research I Universities? ..........................................................108 Implications for Theory ........................................................................................................109 Implications for Practice .......................................................................................................111 Institutional Socialization ..............................................................................................112 Departmental Support ....................................................................................................112 Foreign National Faculty ...............................................................................................115 Recommendations for Future Study .....................................................................................116 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................118 APPENDIX A UFIRB 02 SOCIAL & BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH ......................................................125 B INFORMED CONSENT ......................................................................................................127 C INTERVIEW 1 PROTOCOL ...............................................................................................129 D INTERVIEW 2 PROTOCOL ...............................................................................................130 E SURVEY ..............................................................................................................................131 F RECRUITMENT EMAIL ....................................................................................................133 LIST OF REFERENCES .............................................................................................................135 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .......................................................................................................144
10 LIST OF TABLES Table page 21 Definitions based on theoretical framework/perspective ...................................................46 31 Pilot interviews (Tenure accruing professors not meeting study eligibility criteria) ........55 32 Comparison of conventional and naturalistic terms for reliability and validity ................56 41 Interview one findings .......................................................................................................90 42 Interview two findings .......................................................................................................92 43 Research participant profile (As of Jan/Feb, 2011) ...........................................................93 44 Survey questions and responses .........................................................................................94 51 Comparison of findings for tenure accruing foreign and nonforeign nationals .............121 52 Findings of the Study Based on Theoretical Framework/Perspective .............................122
11 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 51 Zafars model of tenure accruing foreign national faculty socialization processes ........120
12 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Ful fillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy PERCEPTIONS AND EXPERIENCES OF THE SOCIALIZATION PROCESSES AMONG EARLY CAREER FOREIGN NATIONAL TENURE ACCRUING FACULTY IN A RESEARCH I UNIVERSITY By Mueen Aizaz Zafar August 2011 Chai r: Linda S. Behar Horenstein Major: Higher Education Administration This research study investigated the perceptions and experiences of the socialization processes among early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty in a Research I University us ing the grounded research design. The findings revealed that the foreign national faculty appeared to shoulder the triad of tenure track responsibilities i.e., teaching, research, and service amidst unclear and unspoken expectations. However, coming from different cultural back grounds, including collectivist cultures at times foreign national faculty needed more personalized attention than is usually offered in the individualistic culture of the U .S. While they focused on their accomplishments, some of the faculty members paid little attention to the socio cultural requirements of their spouses, and developed relationship concerns. Unspoken and vague expectations about research further complicated faculty work and impeded the adjustment process. Very little research presently exists in this area. Although this study fills that gap in literature, a more concerted and focused socialization process, with clearer departmental expectations, and thoughtful institutional support is likely to e nsure th at multicultural faculty experience more productive, and caring office and home environments.
13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Tenure, according to Byrne (2006), is one of the four freedoms that a university possesses i.e., to determine on academic grounds who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study (p. 181). Balogun & Sloan (2006) define tenure as the expectation of continued employment conferred on a faculty member working for a certain number of years on probationary status a nd is generally linked to academic freedom and property rights of the faculty member. It is an affirmation of potential and future promise of the faculty member to excel based on the evidence of past and current contributions to the institution and to the profession (p.135). A former chair of the American Philosophical Association Committee for the Defense of Professional Rights of Philosophers defined a fair tenure/promotion/retention decision as one that reflects the actual accomplishments of an indivi dual in relation to the expectations detailed in her [/his] contract, faculty handbook, and any existing interim review in the traditional areas of research, teaching, and service (Higgins & Welsh, 2009, p. 177). Assistant professors endure rigorous scru tiny for a period of six years, although some universities do not confer tenure and promotion for up to ten years. During this period their teaching, research and service is evaluated. Individuals who have met departmental, professional and university expe ctations achieve tenure and are promoted to the position of associate professor. Often, after another period of years of hard work, teaching excellence, and national or international recognition, individuals receive promotion to full professor. The struggl es that many new professors experience during the pre tenure years pay off once tenure is earned with the provision of job security, lifelong income, a guarantee of status, and the liberty to research controversial topics. After being tenured, only moral degradation, neglect of duties, or serious budgetary concerns can lead to the termination of this secure status (Fearn Banks, 2004; Link et al., 2008; Youn & Price, 2009). In 1875, the President of Harvard University, Charles William
14 Elliot wrote that perm anence of tenure and security of income are essential to give dignity and independence to the teachers position (Higgins & Welsh, 2009, p.180). The pursuit of attaining tenure is often, however, fraught with difficulties. The literature is replete with reports that the pre tenure faculty struggles are typified as coming to terms with faculty life in academia (Greene et al., 2008; Hamilton, 2005; Hill, 2004; Sorcinelli, 1994). Most new assistant professors feel isolated, detached and compelled to find t heir way in challenging situations on their own (Higgins & Welsh, 2009; Bradley, 2007). According to Toews and Yazedjian (2007), . academia is made up of research, teaching, and servicelife is more difficult than most anticipate because the responsi bilities are time consuming, diverse, and conflicting (p. 113). Despite the fact that Research I universities have more or less clear and apparent work expectations, new faculty (Greene et al., 2008) still need support to learn about the socialization, cu ltural norms, and ways of achieving the detailed/hidden expectations for efficient use of time and effort (Sternberg, 1997). As they transition from students to teachers, new faculty spend much time on teaching due to the teaching loads that they are initially assigned (Levine, 2007). To keep up with their teaching and research responsibilities they spend more time than the hours they are paid every week (Toews & Yazedjian, 2007). Most new faculty struggle to balance their work roles in Research I universit ies (Greene et al., 2008). The constant effort of juggling between responsibilities and attempting to do better can lead to fatigue and burnout, especially for education faculty, which also have a strong service culture (Gappa et al., 2007). New faculty must quickly adjust as they transition from the life of a graduate student to that of professor. They have to negotiate the social, emotional, cognitive, and cultural factors that impact their adjustment as they relocate and
15 enter this profession (Behar Hore nstein, 2010) before undertaking assignments in teaching, service, and graduate advising (Boice, 2000; Goldsmith et al., 2001; Toth, 1997). Institutional support or the lack of it has been cited as one of the stressors new faculty members face during thei r pre tenure years (Bradley, 2007; Greene et al., 2008; Lewallen et al., 2003; McCormick & Barnes, 2008). Academic socialization, a ritualized process that involves the transmission of the organizational culture (Tierney & Benison, 1996 p. 36) can consis t of institutional support that may help to ease the new faculty's transition into the academic environment. Similarly, mentoring, whereby a senior person in the organization takes upon himself/herself to nurture and guide the new faculty through the tenur e process, can support new faculty (Bland et al., 2005; Santo et al., 2009). Many researchers have suggested that mentor support is an aid to the new faculty that brings increased satisfaction, motivation and confidence in discharging the challenges assoc iated with teaching, research and service responsibilities (Dreher & Ash, 1990; Greene et al., 2005; Lewallen et al., 2003; Price & Cotten 2006; Santo et al., 2009). Mentoring is not only useful for the new faculty towards managing their duties and time b etter, it can also be a crucial support in circumventing or overcoming the various challenges they may face like gender, race, color, and cultural biases (Driggs et al., 2007). McCormick and Barnes (2008) suggest that good mentors are empathetic, patient, honest, and accessible, while good mentees are ambitious, open minded, humble, and appreciative. According to these researchers, the perfect match between such a mentor and mentee results in honest, trusting, and supporting relationships that facilitate pr ofessional growth and development. Diversity is a hallmark of American colleges and universities. T o meet the requirements of a globally interdependent world there is a consistent effort to encourage a free flow of ideas,
16 knowledge, and people by educational institutions (Mamiseishvili, 2007). Institutions choose between two strategies to reduce the cultural gap between teachers and students: (a) bring more teachers into the profession who are from culturally diverse communities and (b) try to develop the attitudes and multicultural knowledge base of predominantly White cohorts of pre service teachers (Sleeter, 2001). It is no surprise therefore that there is a corresponding increase in the presence of foreign national faculty in American universities and other educational institutions. Manrique and Manrique (1999) state that international faculty is a highly visible symbol of the changing face of the population in higher education (p. 103). Despite their growing numbers in higher education, very few studie s have been carried out on their perceptions and experiences (Foote et al., 2008; Mamiseishvili, 2007). As a consequence foreign national faculty are not well aware of what to expect from the institutions that they join or what expectations these instituti ons may have of them. Additionally the foreign national faculty is largely ignorant of specific organizational policies, practices, and procedures employed in U .S institutions. Any institutional support provided to them for bringing that clarity and socia lization in service can therefore be of value to such faculty. This study plans to fill the gap in literature by concentrating on the perceptions and experiences of early career foreign national tenureaccruing faculty, using the grounded theory research d esign. Purpose of the Study The purpose of the study is to explore the perceptions and experiences of the socialization processes among early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty in a Research I University located in the southeastern part of the U .S. Research Questions 1. How do early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty perceive the socialization processes in Res 1 universities:
17 A) What are early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty perceptions of the expectation of teaching ? B) What are early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty perceptions of the expectation of research? C) What are early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty perceptions of the expectation of service? D) What are early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty perceptions of unspoken expectations? Definition of Term s Terms used in the study are defined below: BLACK FACULTY. The term is used to represent African American faculty members. EARLY CAREER PROFESSI ONAL. Tenure track faculty prior to mid point review. FOREIGN NATIONAL. People from other nations, for whom U.S. is not where they hold citizenship. MENTOR. A senior person in the organization who helps a new faculty in developing confidence, skill and specific strategies for success (Har dwick, 2005). MENTEE. A new faculty member who is guided by a mentor. MINORITY FACULTY. The term used when referring to underrepresented groups comprising African American, Asian Americans, and Latin Americans. NEW FACULTY. Individuals hired into the acade my prior to mid point review. PRE-TENURE FACULTY/ TENURE TRACK FACULTY. Refers to tenureaccruing assistant professors, who are working towards earning a lifetime appointment in the university setting (Balogun & Sloan, 2006). PROMOTION. Advancement in aca demic rank from assistant to associate and from associate to full professor based on the context where it is used. SOCIALIZATION. An organizational process that allows individuals to learn about the culture, practices, values, attributes, and expectations of the dominant culture.
18 TENURE/TENURED. Refers to faculty member who have earned a lifetime professorial university appointment. WHITE FACULTY. Includes individuals who are not part of Black/African American or other minority groups. Significance of Study Most new faculty spend long working hours to manage their responsibilities, and while struggling through the process, lose worklife balance (Greene et al., 2008). Institutional support can assist them in making a successful transition by providing: clear expectations, a carefully worked out socialization program, and formal/informal mentorship to guide them through the tenure period. Not all institutions do so; it was therefore useful to learn from the early career foreign national faculty in this Resear ch I University whether they receive any institutional support that they consider helpful towards bringing some equanimity in their worklife roles. Since most of the studies conducted on this topic have been quantitative and have us ed large sample sizes, the individual focus on faculty members may serve to illuminate new per s pectives. Research I or Research E xtensive institutions place a greater emphasis on research, while expecting effectiveness in teaching and service responsibilities, which can lead to a stressful work life environment for new professors. The findings of this study may become useful in describing some of the mechanisms that Research I universities can provide faculty to address their work roles and responsibilities while maintaining heal thier personal and family lives. The study will also inform the new faculty about the advantages of institutional support and may emphasize the utility of asking for such support The suggestions or strategies that emerge from this study may guide the huma n resource management functions of these institutions to develop socialization processes that motivate new faculty towards achieving greater work life balance, improved performance at work, and greater involvement at home.
19 Limitations The sample size for this study is rather small since it seeks to explore the perceptions and experiences of only six early career foreign national faculty members from different departments of a large Southeast Research I University in the U .S The findings will not be genera lizable to other higher education institutions in the U .S Moreover individuals may respond differently even to the same questions at different times, and/or may hesitate to divulge important information for multiple reasons, which may hinder fact finding. The quality and depth of the findings will be dependent on the participants' willingness to share relevant information and the researcher's skill as an interviewer.
20 CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE This chapter provides a review of literature to give a background on how new faculty become enculturated into the profession and the academy. The search for relevant literature focused primarily on: a) the struggles that tenure accruing faculty experience in managing their time as they undertake new roles in teaching, research, and service while tackling workload expectations b) r ace, gender, and family status to see if they have a bearing on faculty workload, and time spent c) factors like unspoken expectations, contradictions, and stressors to examine how the y can influence new facultys progress towards achieving tenure and d) i nstitutional support factors to see if they have a role to play in the socialization and adjustment of new faculty. An overview of the following topics tenure expectations and workload, race, gender, family status, unspoken expectations, contradictions and stressors, and institutional support and strategies for success precede a discussion of the study's theoretical framework. Tenure Expectations and Workload Becoming Enculturated int o the Academy The initial years of assistant professors or a period of their pretenure career, is often fraught with stress and difficulties. Huge expectations are placed upon them to demonstrate quality performance in all domains, i.e., teaching, resear ch, and service (Greene et al., 2008; Higgins & Welsh, 2009; McCormick & Barnes, 2008). The personal expectations of heralding on an idyllic life style are soon submerged as they come to terms with, at times, the confusing and conflicting expectations of t he various stakeholders in higher education (Hamilton, 2005; Hill, 2004; Sorcinelli, 1994). Some of these early stressors may actually be the very result of th e idealistic expectation that lures individuals into the prestigious profession of higher education. Fearn Banks (2004) talks about people who leave high profile, high stake positions of the
21 corporate world to settle for a life of ease in academia, only to find that it is no different from the cut throat, backstabbing executives making millions of dollars. Only theres no millions (p. 2). Individuals transitioning from student life to assistant professors are all too soon expected to figure out their role requirements as professionals, right from the very onset. What they need at that time is support from senior colleagues, their departments, and the institutions that they serve, not to mention family and friends. Most early professors, however, complain of a lonely unbalanced life, devoid of any close linkages inside or outside their institutions ( Greene et al., 2008). Although one would expect this situation to ease after the first year or two of service, research indicates that for the majority this stress increases from 33% for first year to 49% in year two and 71% in year five (Greene et al., 2008, p. 40). McCormick and Barnes (2008) call the shock and awe period covering the early days of the tenure track faculty as the imposter syndrome and a time of great emotional upheaval (p. 5). For them this changeover is quite stressful bringing c onflicting expectations and social incarceration including detachment from family, friends, and support groups. Higgins and Welsh (2009) suggest that it is the burn out syndrome of the weekly commitment that faculty ha ve to put in for the trilogy of resear ch, teaching, and service to secure tenure. The stressors i.e., high job demands, low decision making control, and low social support stand out as hallmarks of faculty life in higher education (Bradley, 2007). Those who successfully achieve tenure see it a s an opportunity to rebalance their work lives and enhance their teaching and research interests. Research suggests that there are many, however, who become cynical and are dissuaded from their departments, because of issues like recognition, respect or th e other concerns they experienced prior to achieving tenure (Baker -
22 Fletcher et al., 2005). Despite the terrible tenure stories and experiences, many support and honor the decision they made to become a tenure track faculty, especially in this sluggish, unpredictable and insecure job market situation (Zapp, 2007). Mid point Review The mid point evaluation for newly appointed assistant professors takes place in the third year, whereas the decision for tenure and promotion is typically made in the sixth year. In their research covering junior and senior faculty experiences, Price and Cotten (2006) found that reappointment, though not clearly defined, was a relatively routine process declaring most faculty successful except for those receiving disastrous teach ing (p. 8) records or student complaints. One respondent in their study explained it as, Keep your nose clean. Dont embarrass the department (p. 8). Most other faculty members believed service to be an unimportant criterion for reappointment. Workload Expectations Per the Carnegie classification, Research Extensive or Research I university faculty carr y a 40% teaching, 40% research, and 20% service load (Greene et al., 2008). Based on this load, faculty are expected to teach a total of four courses (1 2 credit hours), produce two publications and provide 3 hours per week of service each year. Researchers found congruence in the work load and faculty expectations in Research Extensive universities. Green (2008) observed that R esearch E xtensive and R esearch I ntensive universities, with doctoral degree programs held scholarship as the primary expectation, teaching as the second important consideration and service as tertiary for promotion and tenure decisions. In a study comprised of D eans of masters and doctoral degree level programs in social work, importance of the three work roles of teaching, scholarship, and service contributing towards tenure and promotion decisions was assessed. While ranking on the basis of the work role salience index,
23 44.3% (n = 27) supported scholarship salience, 31.1% (n = 19) reported teaching/scholarship salience, 8.2% (n = 5) mentioned teaching, and 16.4% (n = 10) identified work role equivalence. For research universities the deciding factor for promotion and tenure is res earch. Most campuses emphasize rules like publish or perish (Li Ping & Chamberlain, 2003, p. 105). This is demonstrated as excellent teachers are rated as locals or provincials and paid much less than the more illustrious nationals and internationals based on their research productivity (p. 106). Remler and Pema (2009) found that research, both funded and nonfunded, is increasingly becoming the criterion for faculty promotions and rewards, even for professional schools, such as business schools. Others criticize this trend, claiming that it results in the neglect of teaching and a disregard to the quality of students education (Price & Cotten 2006; Youn & Price, 2009). How Professors Use Assigned Time In a study of change over twenty years, Mi lem et al. (2000) talk about institutional isomorphism, implying that educational institutions tend to imitate others. This happened as other educational institutions emulate Research I institutions by requiring their faculty members to pursue higher amounts of scholarly/publication activity (Youn & Price, 2009). Remler and Pema (2009) believe that all institutions under the Carnegie classification system are following research universities since research drives prestige. They mentioned that a reduction in teaching loads has provided more discretionary time to faculty which is now being spent on research. They explain that this discretionary time seems to emanate from a reduced time in preparing, actual teaching, grading assignments, and meeting students. Di scretional time spent on research has changed the academic reward structure to favor research over other faculty responsibilities. Milem et al. (2000) see this as the initiation of a homogenized or single reward structure that higher education is adopting and leading other institutions into also Although they posit that department chairs value teaching, the actual pay, tenure, and promotion decisions are based
24 almost exclusively on research productivity, irrespective of institution types. According to the authors, while faculty have become more serious about teaching and research, they are less concerned about student advising. They see clear trends whereby the authorities in American higher education are consciously changing the way faculty spend time. S tudying different institutions, Bellas and Toutkoushian (1999) found the faculty at research universities spent the most time on research followed by the doctoral universities and other institutions in the Carnegie classification. They feel that the contra diction in higher education is that it emphasizes teaching but rewards research. Considering that faculty s pend more time on research, at the expense of student advising, they believe that the reward structure in higher education prohibits student contact and its positive outcomes. Link et al. (2008) found that differing preferences, family responsibilities, and institutional biases may result in different time allocation paths by gender, and these outcomes may have implication for the likelihood of acade mic success (p. 364). There are not many studies that reveal how individuals allocate time between competing activities like teaching, research, and service. Even if one may uphold the notion shared by some that in ideal situations individuals can integra te the three so that they complement and support each other, it still goes on to show that since time is finite or zero sum balance, allocating it for one activity will logically take it away from the other. Using a sample of 1365 nonadministrative scien tists and engineers from 150 Carnegie Extensive Doctoral/Research Universities Link et al. (2008) studied how time was spent per week in terms of four activities i.e., teaching, research, grant writing, and service. The findings revealed that faculty on an average worked 54 hours per week, spending maximum time on research 19 hours (36%), then teaching 17 hours (32%), grant writing 4 hours (8%), and service
25 13 hours (24%). Milem et al. (2000) further stated that university faculty in sciences, engineering a nd social sciences devote about fifty percent less time on instructional activities as compared to their counterparts in other academic fields Link et al. (2008) also found that nontenured faculty members spent on average two and a half hours more i.e., a total of 56.01 hours per week as compared to tenured faculty, including associate faculty. Additionally, non tenured faculty spent more time on research and grant writing and lesser hours on service compared to tenured faculty. Toews and Yazedjian (2007) also suggested that new faculty members spent more time than paid weekly hours in order to catch up with their responsibilities of teaching, research and service. The majority of the time was spent on teaching and research. Davis et al. s (2006) study wa s conducted with the aim of providing some benchmark requirements to faculty for promotion and tenure Their findings revealed that on average new faculty (assistant professors) counselor education programs spent 55.11% time on teaching, 26.26% on research and 18.23% on service. The se respondents strongly supported Boyers (1990) model of scholarship i.e., the scholarship of discovery (research), the scholarship of integration (practice), the scholarship of application (service), and the scholarship of teaching (Wise et al., 2008, p. e 52). They opted for that in place of the traditional model of teaching, scholarship, and service receiving a mean score of 3.64 out of a 4 point on a Likert scale. They also felt that the publish or perish phrase should accordingly be applied equally for the other two domains, i.e., teach well or perish and serve well or perish (Davis et al., 2006, p. 153). Walker et al. (2008) and Davis et al. (2006) posit that despite the university mandates of balancing the three f old mission of research, teaching and service, the real focus remains on research for promotion and tenure decisions in most educational institutions. Good teaching is expected but rarely privileged, so much so that research as the dominant model is even pulling
26 other faculty especially that of liberal arts into two directions of research and teaching simultaneously. Baker Fletcher et al. (2005) use the example of the hourglass to explain the juggling between teaching and research. They illustrate that teaching is one side of the hourglass and research the other side. When you erect the hourglass the focus soon shifts all the way to the other side and vice versa, it is very difficult to balance the two sides concurrently. Milem et al. (2000) mentioned that tenure track faculty relate to the teaching research relationship in different ways. The faculty members differ in the way they view the two as complementary, unrelated/independent, or conflicting. It is therefore easy to determine that those relating to the first category will feel good about research alongside teaching whereas the rest would find the relationship as a strain/struggle during the tenure process. Bellas and Toutkoushian (1999) found teaching, service and research to be exclusive activities a nd those spending more time on teaching and service were not devoting as much time on research. Toews and Yazedjian (2007) agree that teaching and research are in conflict, but feel that providing time to both enables one to be a stronger faculty member. Research can help inform and enhance teaching, and the reverse may also be true. Teachers who were well grounded in research were confident, more credible, and had a greater chance of promoting critical thinking in classroom discussions. Terpstra and Hon oree (2009) indicate that based on the type and size of institution, the emphasis on teaching and research varies. Some institutions lay importance on teaching, while others assign a greater significance to research. They stress that appropriating greater time and effort to teaching is a disservice to students. They observed that faculty who allocate equal importance to both teaching and research were the most satisfied and hence more motivated to
27 perform. Similarly institutions assigning an equal weight to the two functions were more appealing to faculty and well placed in recruiting and retaining good faculty members. Levine (2007) concluded that heavy teaching loads provided less time for research. Making matters more difficult for new faculty members wa s the high number of advisees and the task of overseeing dissertations. His study revealed the irony of doing well in advising those who were good advise rs got more advisees, further complicating the situation for them as they struggled to find a balance between their commitment to teaching and their quest for research production. Gappa et al. (2007), referring to the strong service culture in the education faculty, pointed out that it makes their task even more daunting, driving them in all different dir ections. According to Santo et al. (2009), school of education faculty must be super faculty members to not perish and they may in fact be perishing by publishing (p. 119). This continuous, nonstop juggling between activities, while aiming for perfe ctionism, may eventually lead to work fatigue, and reduction in motivation and productivity. In a recent study, 50 % of new faculty from Research I institutions conveyed that balancing between research, teaching, and service was either nonexistent or enorm ously difficult (Greene et al., 2008). Most of the new faculty feel burnout by the time they reach the tenure stage. In a study surveying 15,000 faculty members from 89 colleges it was discovered that job satisfaction for faculty is lowest in the 8th ye ar of service, i.e. soon after attaining tenure. The study also revealed that faculty satisfaction increased towards the end of their careers (Santo et al., 2009). This is surprising considering the enthusiasm of faculty members at the time of appointment and the pursuit of tenure, which according to Balogun and Sloan (2006) is the most cherished reward that is well sought after within the ivory tower (p. 134).
28 Teaching Price and Cotten (2006) found teaching to be an important factor for appointment, al though they did not think that one had to be an amazing teacher to secure tenure. Some of the respondents in Higgins and Welshs (2009) study expressed the importance of teaching by saying: students can kill you but they cant get you through and that [ you will] never get tenure for being a good teacher, but you wont get tenure without it (p. 9). Toews and Yazedjian (2007) asserted that despite its unquestioned importance, teaching was an insufficient condition for securing tenure. Teaching does not c ome naturally to everyone, and so the timelines for new faculty vary accordingly. Some approach their first day of class as a moment of terror; some revert to lecturing after failing to manage interactive sessions; and some incorporate extensive details fo r the fear of running out of material in the course of their lectures (Lang, 2005). Toews and Yazedjian (2007) suggest that new faculty may be better advised to start teaching by modeling successful teachers from their past studies, and relying on what they used in their classes. To manage time and this role activity better, they recommended that new faculty teach certain days of the week and leave full days for research. They also caution teachers not to spend too much or too little time for class preparat ion. As a yardstick they advise spending one and a half to three hours for one class hour. They felt that overlapping teaching with research work could make the new faculty more efficient. Research Research productivity typically includes a number of publications in academic refereed journals, scholarly chapters and books. In addition conference presentations, grant applications, awards, and dollar amounts of grants are also taken into account (Santo et al., 2009). Higgins and Welsh (2009) found that ther e were different scholarly requirements for different fields. In the
29 natural and social sciences the refereed journal is the requirement; for scientific publication, it is the journal article; and for humanities it is the book. The authors also mentioned t hat for the library and information sciences (LIS) in the U .S the favored scholarship include the number of yearly research grants, conference papers, or research rewards received. Price and Cotten (2006) reported that junior faculty in research univers ities expect to publish six to twelve, mostly peer reviewed publications. S elfauthorship and author ordering for co authored publications is given significant importance. DuPree et al. (2009) suggested checking the impact factor (p. 205), to evaluate the quality of scholarship. They explain that the impact factor relates to how often and widely a research article is cited elsewhere. Securing grants is expected of faculty However, while grant awards can reduce the total number of publications expected, t hey do not replace this objective. Since scholarly activity is a core requirement, new faculty could start by preparing their dissertation for publication. Some s cholars recommend publishing the dissertations as a book or creating separate articles (Toew s, & Yazedjian, 2007). As they mature in the art of writing for publication they can consider co authorship and working with graduate assistants on new research projects. Another preferred activit y is pr eparing conference proposals. This allows the new fa culty t o share their work with peers and seniors, stimulating future research work and ideas. The authors also suggest that new faculty build collaborative relationships, combine different author expertise to add richness and depth to research production. Like other researchers, the authors suggest new faculty negotiate release time, block out dedicated research times each day into to do lists, and break down events like work on manuscript, [into smaller unit is such as] write literature review; write methods section; run analysis; write results; and
30 so on (p. 117). This allows building different timelines and reduces the monotony of working on one big task (Harvey & Thompson, 2009). Santo et al. (2009) indicated several intrinsic and extrinsic factors that are influential in research productivity for faculty (p. 121). The formation of research circles in campuses of higher education can also be helpful as they relieve the feelings of isolation and frustration, and help in fostering faculty collegiality and research. Bode (1999) argued that new faculty value collegiality even more than mentoring. Researchers found evidence that faculty members motivated for promotion and tenure show better research performance records than faculty members who struggle to focus in their initial period of tenure track appointment (Higgins & Welsh, 2009). Studies indicate that faculty with networks restricted to their division or school level are less productive than those having a wider network of colleagues pertaining to t heir field (Santo et al., 2009). Some university departments have tried to showcase their regional identity and localized appearance by becoming internationalized in their research, teaching, and service. Bogotch and Maslin Ostrowski (2010) narrates the e vents of one university department that jumped the curve from local to international. Katz (2006) criticizes the approach: T he orientation of the profession from teachers to researchers and from local communities to national and international ones has had serious practical consequences. Since we have so little loyalty to our particular universities, we are less likely to serve them well, either in the classroom or in the performance of other necessary functions (p. 4) We have become super professionals, committed to our research disciplines and organizations rather than to local teaching institutions (p. 1). As a consequence of this situation, he adds, critics have long alleged that doctoral students know more and more about less and lessthat is surel y true, and not necessarily intellectually productive (p. 5).
31 Service Toews and Yazedjian (2007) contend that service obligations are a distraction [between teaching and research], but would be sorely missed [if not provided] (p. 114). They opine that service is not much of a consideration at the time of tenure decision. Concurring that viewpoint, Price and Cotten (2006) also found service to be the least important consideration for tenure decisions. However, they cautioned that too little or too much service could be a source of trouble for faculty members. One of their study participant reported that service shows a fit in with your colleagues (p. 10). Toews and Yazedjian (2007) advise faculty to be efficient in time usage with students and only m eet for appointments or during specified office hours. Although the authors do not favor the notion of spending long hours on service or chairing committees before tenure, they assert that service activities can develop useful rapport with students, assist in forming collegial relationships with other faculty members, and provide important information about the institution. They also advise integrating service with teaching and scholarship by serving as reviewer, to gain new ideas while helping their profes sional community. In a three year long study formed to recond recently tenured professors perceptions of service requirements in major research universities, Neumann and Terosky (2007) found that , faculty service was broad ranging, eclectic, variable and thereby under defined; increasingly prominent but underappreciated; [creating] tension between content [who gains others, outwardly oriented], and context [type of activities professors perform in their service roles how professors make sense of i t] perspectives; seen as new work; overload, [and] self replication (pp. 282283). To manage time between the triad of teaching, research, and service and to reduce stress levels, one respondent pointed out the necessity of setting specific times for eac h activity and sticking religiously to that plan From the perspective of personal gain, service may appear useful and less stressful to new faculty, especially since it comes as part of the package.
32 Race, Gender, and Family Status Race and Gender Differences Literature on minority faculty reveals barriers dealing with employment and retention. Apart from taking on the challenges of teaching and research, minority faculty members have to shoulder extra service responsibilities by addressing minority conce rns and providing other student support to those from diverse environments. T hey also have to confront marginality, otherness, living/navigating between two worlds and silent voices (Stanley, 2006b, p. 3). Diggs et al. (2009) profess that when differenc es are not equally valued, individuals and groups are marginalized (p. 314). African American female faculty had to do more teaching, advising and committee work than their counterpart male and female White faculty had to produce. Stanley (2006a) called, being a woman and being a woman of color, a Double Bind Syndrome (p. 705), as women of color had to also frequently undergo gender marginalization in institutions. In a study of 14,614 faculty members, Bellas and Toutkoushion (1999) found that men work ed significantly greater number of hours as compared to women. Women spent 6% less time than men [on research] and published one fifth less over a two year period of analysis. Wom en spent a significantly greater time in teaching than men and hence needed more time in course preparation. Men devoted the time saved on teaching towards research. The authors felt that because wo men were scrutinized more than their male counterparts they were more self conscious, less confident of their work, as a result of whi ch their productivity suffered The study also showed that women and minorities, including Afrian Amerian faculty, had to make greater effort to get published. Consequently they comparatively have less research output than their White counterparts White s and Asians worked the most number of hours as compared to other racial categories. Asians and Latinos also spent a larger proportion of their time on research compared to other racial categories and recorded the highest research
33 productivity. Black facul ty spent less time on teaching as compared to Whites, although along with Latinos they spent a greater time on service due to the demands coming from Black students, administrators and community groups (Bellas and Toutkoushion, 1999). Diggs et al. (2009) indicated scheduling overloads, disproportionate committee work (Baker Fletcher et al., 2005; Toews & Yazidjians, 2007), denigration of research limited to racial and ethnic issues, and a lack of mentoring were the main barriers facing faculty of color. Th e authors discovered that women have fewer research publications in almost all science areas other than neurosciences, although they secured larger grants (Santo et al., 2009). Wolfinger et al. (2009) found women to have 21% fewer chances of getting tenure d or promoted to full professor. In a study of 24 tenure track faculty members from the School of Education of a midwestern university (Santo et al., 2009).found no significant difference in productivity levels was discovered on the basis of rank, gender or age. P roductivity decreased as rank increased but t his was assumed to be due to decreased faculty motivation after tenure The study suggested a need for professional growth initiatives for senior faculty such as courses, workshops, conferences, and c ollaborative research with colleagues from the School of Education as well as outside. Link et al. (2008) discovered that female faculty spent greater total time towards their work responsibilities than male faculty i.e., 55.02 hours compared to 53.83 hours each week. Women spent more time on teaching, grant writing and service and lesser time on research. Despite spending less overall time, men spent three hours a week more on research as compared to women The authors concluded that during the tenure acc ruing years men spent 900 more hours per year than women on research. Men decreased their work on grant writing as they ascend in rank, unlike women. However, service for both increased with rank. A ssociate
34 professors devoted more time to teaching than as sistant professors, and female full professors taught the least while doing maximum service. A lthough tenured professors spent less time on research, they maintained their research proficiency due to more refined research skills. They felt that tenure acte d as a deterrent for faculty towards research productivity. Lewallen et al. (2003) found that minority/immigrant faculty harbored a feeling of social isolation due to language and cultural barriers. They struggle in the face of publishing demands, review tenure, and promotion more than White faculty. In addition, they have to spend greater amount of time on lecture preparation, paper grading, grant writing, and writing or reviewing manuscripts. The 2005 Chronicle of Higher Education Almanac shows that c ulturally diverse individuals comprise 15% of all permanent faculty (Kuykendall, 2006). This small percentage places pressure on them to represent the departmental voice in all cases of diversity and serv e as advisors for culturally diverse students. Moreover, some also require a greater amount of time on classroom preparation due to their language deficiencies. The opposing forces and pressures faced by the se faculty limit time spent on research related activities. Additionally, they experience feelings of isolation with fewer mentoring relationships, causing severe stress and marginality (Hollenshead & Thomas, 2001). Despite these harsh conditions they still managed to spend as much time on research as White faculty, though spending more hours per week to balance their other role requirements. Kuykendall reported that minority and women faculty were discriminated five times more than their counterpart White faculty. F aculty of color spent less time, was on administrative tasks, support ing the notion that th ey do not possess leadership abilities. Gender blind and race blind policies and practices assume that all individuals interpret
35 institutional life in the same way, ignoring the likelihood that the interpretations of women and minorities differ from those of White men (Perna 2001, p. 563). Family Status Married family members find that tenure track responsibilities compete and conflict with family obligations (Lang, 2005). They have to juggle the two roles at the expense of one or the other. Bellas and Toutkoushian (1999), however, found that married men worked more hours per wee k on research, and published more than unmarried men. They also found that married faculty involved themselves less in service. However, those with more dependents actually spent more time on service, although working fewer total hours per week. Married faculty worked fewer total hours, taught less, but spent about the same hours allocated to other activities as nonmarried faculty. Time allocation of faculty with children was found to be approximately the same as faculty who did not have any children (Link et al., 2008). Unspoken Expectations, Contradictions and Stressors Unspoken Expectations Researchers suggest that expectations should be clearly defined to new faculty at the start of the tenure process (Toews & Yazedjian, 2007). However, studies reveal that they are not clearly articulated or predefined, forcing junior faculty grope around on the basis of their own assessments of institutional expectations. In the study conducted by Price and Cotten (2006) most junior faculty mentioned that the only time there was any reference of expectations was during their interview stage. They felt collegiality and collaboration was much less in reality than as expressed in the interview. Moreover, they found the evidence of significantly more service and student advising than mentioned in their interviews. The expectations for research productivity were also not clearly defined.
36 Despite the clearly laid down expectations for the three domains of teaching, research and service in the research universities, there is significant confusion as to what really counts towards tenure. Respondents in Greene et al. (2008) study revealed that most institutions did not convey upfront what was valued m ore of the three towards the tenure decision. All of the respondents from only one Research I institution reported that research was valued more, while participants from the other Research I U niversity indicated varied responses between the teaching and re search emphasis. Santo et al. (2009) found teacher educator scholars to be following the wrong line by focusing on professional practice since it is actually research productivity which is more often used as a gauge to determine faculty performance. In addition, they posit that since the education faculty spends so much time on teaching, finding sufficient time to generate good research is often difficult. Greene et al. (2008) comment ed that the number of publications in the research category merely shows the comparative side of things; however, there also are other important factors to be considered like authorship, and quality of journal, etc. While collaboration is encouraged, it is independent writing, which is in fact rewarded. Moreover, they felt tha t not being grounded in needed research and publishing skills thwarted most faculty members efforts toward research productivity. Balogun and Sloan (2006) conducted a comparative study in which they surveyed D eans of National League for Nursingaccredit ed programs and D eans of allied health programs belonging to the Association of Schools of Allied Health Professions (p. 135). They discovered that as many as 75% of Deans, each from allied health and nursing, rated teaching as the main consideration in tenure decisions, while a mere 22% and 19% respectively rated research to be the main criterion. Only 1% and 4% sided with service to be the most important factor for tenure.
37 Contradictions and Stressors Youn and Price (2009) found that a majority of faculty in research universities did not agree with the criteria whereby research and productivity is the primary consideration for tenure and promotion. Supporting the same, Boyer (1990) posit is that almost all colleges pay lip service to the trilogy of tea ching, research, and service, but when it comes to making judgment about professional performance, the three rarely are assigned equal merit (p. 15). He stresses that invariably scholarly activity, i.e., research and publication, is more valued than teaching and service. Mignor (2000) echoes the same concerns, stressing that teaching and service in professions like nursing compete fairly with research in contributing to the disciplines scholarship. In reality, however, most faculty members have to give up teaching clinical courses in the face of the growing concern for research and publication requirements. Wise et al. (2008) highlight the challenges and miseries of allied health faculty, who, while providing training for student health care practitioners, have to meet the other requirements of research, scholarship and service. Heavy teaching loads and service expectations make it difficult for some to meet their research requirements. Considering this daunting task that allied health faculty face, Wise et al. (2008) emphasize the incorporation of the Boyers (1990) model which defines scholarship across four categories i.e., research, teaching, practice, and service. The authors appeal to move away from the single narrow criteria of research for granting tenure and promotion and to devote equal emphasis on all the essential work requirements. The authors also emphasize Glassicks (1997) standards for evaluating success, ) clear goals, 2) adequate preparation, 3) appropriate methods, 4) significant resul ts, 5) effective communication, and 6) reflective critique (p. e 53). In an article concerning the promotion requirements for clinical faculty in Research I Purdue University School of Nursing, Kirkpatrick et al. (2001) stated that the university as per
38 senate approval could only have 5% of the entire faculty or 15% of faculty in any one school to be clinical faculty. The tenure or promotion requirement for the clinical faculty required them to focus predominantly on teaching. The definition of scholars hip for clinical faculty based on acquisition of new knowledge was hence considered too narrow, and a potential barrier for promotion to the clinical track faculty concentrating on teaching. To resolve this quagmire, the school incorporated the four part m odel advocated by Boyer and Rice to the existing three part promotion criterion of research, teaching and service (Boyer, 1990; Rice, 1991). The Boyer and Rice model comprising scholarship of discovery, practice/application, integration, and teaching suite d the clinical faculty since while targeting research and service, the model has a clear teaching emphasis as well. The same model has also been found useful for evaluation and scholarship (Eddy, 2007). Researchers point out the contradiction of expectati ons in research universities where administrators and senior faculty emphasize teaching while rewarding research (Price & Cotten, 2006; Youn & Price, 2009). Ironically, the opposite is true for teaching universities where research is promoted and yet teach ing loads prohibit the same. The only uniformity they could find at two institutions was that service was not considered a significant requirement at either one (Price & Cotten 2006). According to Santo et al. (2009), insufficient and unclear feedback on performance can lead to confusing tenure expectations, compounded by fear of changing evaluators (119). Major stressors for new faculty are overwhelming workloads and unfamiliar university cultures. An apprehension that universities may be increasing requirements for tenure and promotion is also a constant source of stress for new faculty (Lewallen et al., 2003).
39 Institutional Support and Strategies for Success Institutional Support Organizational support is an important aspect for university faculty, w hether tenure accruing or tenured (Creamer, 1995; Santo et al., 2009). Identifying factors leading to successful research productivity, 19 tenured school of education faculty mentioned personal qualities, graduate programs, organizational support, and par ticipation in associations (Creamer 1995, p. 119). In the study conducted by Greene et al. (2008), respondents (n = 96) indicated a varying degree of formal and informal support provided by their institutions; some even reported receiving virtually no su pport whatsoever. Fifty percent (n= 48) of the respondents mentioned having been assigned a formal mentor, of which only seventeen percent (n = 16) found the ensuing relationship to be useful. Most found the mentors to be either too busy, uninterested in t he mentees research focus, or not keen to publish with them. Sixty three percent (n = 60) of the respondents reported that the best support they received was from colleagues, while eighteen percent (n =17) mentioned receiving teaching support in the form of workshops, fewer class preps, course release time and peer observation (p. 436) . Ten percent (n =10) of respondents conveyed that they did not receive any support or help that was useful Organizational characteristics providing sufficient time, in trinsic motivation, formal mentorship, culture that values research, and a network of external colleagues are associated with greater research productivity (Santo et al., 2009, p. 120). However, Santo et al. (2009) reported only 15% of the respondents in their study received release time, essential for grant preparation, while below 50% received summer research stipends. McCormick and Barnes (2008) specify the characteristic of good mentors as empathetic, patient, honest, and accessible and for good mente es as ambitious, open minded, humble, and appreciative. According to them the perfect
40 match between such a mentor and mentee result in honest, trusting, and supporting relationships that facilitate professional growth and development. Greene et al. (2008) indicated that the most needed support among faculty mentioned was for research (39%). Respondents suggested support such as having a mentor, writing groups, travel money, grant funding, and research sharing with peers. Other suggestions included: cours e load reductions, an untenured faculty handbook, administrative support, workshops, clear expectations, and more communication (p. 437). Santo et al. (2009) offers similar suggestions including by rank order time i.e., support (release time) while acqui ring new research skills, graduate assistant support, internal funding opportunities, reduced teaching load, statistical assistance, support group for research and writing, and faculty professional development Recommended Support Greene et al. (2008) provided a model of comprehensive support for new faculty (Figure 21) Their model identifies support mechanisms to ease the onset of this difficult balancing act for the new faculty/assistant professors, as they embark on their prestigious intellectual jour ney in higher education: Other researchers also recommended the following: 1) Mentor support: Assigned mentors can reduce new facultys anxieties and apprehensions. Mentoring can manifest increased satisfaction, motivation and confidence in pursuing tenure (D reher & Ash, 1990; Lewallen et al., 2003; Price & Cotten 2006; Santo et al., 2009). While formal mentoring relationships are essential, Price and Cotten (2006) also emphasize the importance of informal mentoring. For the faculty of color, both formal and informal mentoring can lead to greater retention of professors (Diggs et al., 2009). 2) To foster research culture, faculty should be encouraged to set aside weekly uninterrupted research times. The same may be posted on their doors so that no one disturbs them. Universities can support faculty scholarship by providing maximum research related resources, i.e., links to journals, information on existing research programs, samples of research productivity, etc. Encouraging faculty to relate research with the courses they teach can lead to publications that may inform their teaching. Departments may create writing groups for sharing and provide statistical support. By publicizing institutional
41 support for research, and acknowledging good research, faculty are more likely to be motivated and successful in their scholarship (Santo et al., 2009). 3) Limited responsibilities: Provide a reduced course load and limit service responsibilities, at least during the initial years of the tenure track period. To permit new facult y with some breathing space, they should be allowed to take stock of the challenges and requirements and develop in a less rushed and organized manner (Greene et al. 2008; Santo et al. 2009). 4) Clear expectations: The most frustrating single factor affecting new faculty transition in academia is unclear or changing expectations. By providing a clear statement of expectations, followedup and reviewed periodically, institutions can assist faculty in their quest for tenure (Greene et al. 2008; Price & Cotten, 2 006; Santo et al. 2009; Youn & Price, 2009). 5) Open communication and collegiality: Department chairs and senior faculty should maintain open channels of communication by organizing orientation meetings, personnel committee linkages, regular annual or biannual feedback meetings, and progress meetings towards tenure (Greene et al., 2008; Price & Cotten, 2006; Santo et al., 2009). 6) Providing a seminar on college and university faculty: Price and Cotten (2006) suggest that graduate students should be well grounde d on the role of the assistant professors in the final year of their studies. They feel that graduate schools can offer a seminar taught by senior professors who should guide graduating students on what to expect as a new faculty member and how to handle different roles, situations and individuals while addressing other issues of pedagogy, classroom management, and other related items (p. 14). At the University of Florida, one professor, Dr. Behar Horenstein in the College of Education started a similar course in Spring 2010 for graduate and doctoral students. The author was enrolled in the course. Important aspects like transitioning from student to professor, writing a statement of teaching philosophy, preparing a course syllabus, constructing a teachi ng portfolio, developing a research agenda, conducting professor interviews to gain insight in the profession, strategies for student engagement, and promoting critical thinking were among the course topics Strategies for Success McCormick and Barnes (2008) advise that better time management can be introduced, and cautioned an over indulgence of teaching in comparison to the rest of the workload. New or pre tenured faculty tend to devote proportionally more time to teaching, to seek immediate
42 gratification at the expense of research. They suggest that faculty not spend more than two hours for every classroom hour taught Regarding service, the faculty should serve on issues related to recruitment, admissions and curriculum in the first year and later expan d to department level service in an attempt to build a reputation of a good academic citizen (p. 15). Harvey and Thompson (2009) feel that working more than sixty hours a week is not a choice and often necessary for new faculty as they prepare and teach new courses and develop a new research agenda. They suggest faculty to consider that good enough is often sufficient. Doing ones best at all times adds to stress and lead others into holding high expectations, making it difficult to accomplish on a regula r basis. Theoretical Framework Considering that this study explores the perceptions and experiences of foreign nationals, it is grounded in multiculturalism. Multiculturalism as defined by Nemetz and Christensen (1996) is an environment designed for a combination of several distinct cultures (p. 438). They go on to add the dimension of assimilation and acculturation (p. 438) to the definition. In the U .S and Canada most individuals relate to more than one cultural tradition and as such multiculturality is increasing at a rapid pace and is becoming more widespread than the mono cultural experience (Ivey et al., 2002) An interplay of individualistic and collectivist cultures can help individuals understand cultural differences. Spring (2008) explains t hat for the individualistic cultures the individual is the focal point and such societies emphasize individual achievement and self direction. Collectivist societies stress conformity to tradition and group values (p. 7). He provides a list of the ten m ost individualistic and ten most collectivist countries. In rank order, the U .S tops the most individualistic nations followed by Australia, Denmark, Germany, Finland, Norway, Italy,
43 Austria, Hungary and South Africa. The top ten collectivist countries ar e headed by China followed by Columbia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Korea, Peru, Ghana, Nepal, Nigeria, and Tanzania. According to Sue and Sue (2004), biculturalism is best understood in the United States as the interaction between a dominant and nondominant culture (p. 160). A multicultural person, according to Nieto (2004) is one who emphasizes pluralism confronts [personal] racism and biases and is willing to see reality from a variety of perspectives (p. 383 384). Hence by that definition a multicultural person who has had his early experiences in a collectivist culture can move on and see things differently from the perspective of those originating from individualistic cultures and vice versa. Such an individual can adjust and adapt to both culture s by smoothly moving from one to the other. Spring (2008) relates this to multicultural minds that are capable of frame switching. According to Fitzsimmons (2007) b icultural frame switching refers to subconsciously switching between cultural frames that both reside within the individual. Neither frame is foreign or forced; they are both part of the self (p. 162 163). A recent concept known as code switching on the other hand refers to a process of deliberately displaying culturally appropriate behavior w ithin single individual episodes and relates somewhat to impression management (Molinsky, 2007). Research suggests that language plays an important part in the employment process, and is a predictor for depression for those who do not get absorbed in the labor market in the early years of resettlement (Beiser & Hou, 2001). Spring (2008) posits that anyone growing up in a multicultural state like the U .S can develop a bicultural or multicultural mind and frequently switch between two different cultural fra mes. While talking about gender he mentions that for many immigrant women, the United States provides an opportunity for self assertion and a break with former servile roles (p. 186). He suggests that it takes a greater intellectual effort to
44 acculturate than to assimilate. He goes on to provide a five step process each for bicultural as well as assimilative development. The interplay of different cultures and races bring forth racial discrimination that exists in educational as well as other institution s of society (Nieto, 2004). Sue and Sue (2004) present similar views in their discussion of the different racial/cultural identity development models, along with their various steps that exist in the U .S such as: 1) The Black identity development model ha ving pre encounter, encounter, immersionemersion, internalization, and internalization commitment stages; 2) The Asian American identity development model with the ethnic awareness, White identification, awakening to social political consciousness, redire ction, and incorporation stages; and 3) Latino/Hispanic American identity development with casual, cognitive, consequence, working through, and successful resolution stages. They do however add the disclaimer that it may be unwise to assume that all Blacks, Asians, Hispanics and American Indians are all intrinsically similar and will behave the same way. To conclude, they provide a broad conceptual framework for understanding the attitudes and behaviors of culturally different individuals in the form of a racial/cultural identity development model including five stages i.e., conformity, dissonance, resistance, introspection, and integrative awareness. Discussing the topic of cultural competence Sue and Sue (2004) mention that a person who is a culturally competent helping professional is: 1) actively in the process of becoming aware of his or her own assumptions about human behavior, values, biases, preconceived notions, personal limitations, and so forth 2) actively attempts to understand the wor ldview of his or her culturally different client assumptions about human behavior, biases and so on and 3) in the process of actively developing and practicing appropriate, relevant, and sensitive interventional strategies and skill in working with his or her culturally different client (p. 18). A multidimensional model for developing cultural competence, offered by Sue (2001) clarifies this further. In the model she presents three dimensions, 1) group specific worldview
45 covering race, gender, sexual orientation, physical ability, age in terms of multiracial groups such as European American, Native American, Latino American, Asian American, and African American; 2) c omponents of cultural competence such as awareness of attitudes/beliefs, knowledge, and skills; and 3) f oci of c ultural c ompetence including the individual, professional, organizational, and societal levels. T able 21, comprising definitions on multiculturism emanating from the theoretical framework/perspective is provided at the end of the chapter Summary To many, the first several years of the professoriate herald the most stressful period in their lives. Some endure the challenges, while some seriously start to contemplate whether they need to continue leading this stressful life (L ang, 2005; Fearn Banks, 2004). Institutional support, often seen as a function of human resources, therefore needs to be provided to new faculty to ease their transition into the profession. Department chair and senior faculty can assist new faculty by cre ating a helpful atmosphere which promotes positive outcomes for them as well as the entire department and organization. After receiving tenure, faculty may go on to become senior members of the department or even department C hair. Providing opportunities t o settle them amicably may help faculty to become confident, motivated and productive, as well as creating a more collegial environment for mutual collaboration.
46 Table 2 1. Definitions based on theoretical framework/perspective M ULTICULTURALISM (S PRING 2008) An interplay of individualistic and collectivist cultures can help individuals understand cultural differences. M ULTICULTURAL PERSON (N IETO 2004) A multicultural person emphasizes pluralismand can adjust and adapt to both cultures F RAME S WITCHING (F ITZSIMMONS 2007) Bicultural frame switching refers to subconsciously switching between cultural frames that both reside within the individual C ODE SWITCHING (M OLINSKY 2007) In linguistics, code switching is the concurrent use of more than one language, or language variety, in conversation A CCULTURATION / ASSIMILATION (S PRING 2008) It takes a greater intellectual effort to acculturate than to assimilate. L ANGUAGE AS A PREDICT OR FOR DEPRESSION AN D UNEMPLOYMENT (B EISER & H OU 2001). La nguage plays an important part in the employment process, and is a predictor for depression for those who do not get absorbed in the labor market in the early years of resettlement I MMIGRATION AND GENDE R (S PRING 2008) For many immigrant women, the Uni ted States provides an opportunity for self assertion and a break from former servile roles R ACIAL DISCRIMINATION (N IETO 2004) The interplay of different cultures and races bring forth racial discrimination that exists in educational as well as other institutions of society (Nieto, 2004). C ULTURALLY COMPETENT HELPING PROFESSIONAL (S UE & S UE 2004) Presence of a culturally competent helping professional who is aware, actively attempts to understand the worldviews, and develops and practices appropri ate, relevant, and sensitive interventional strategies for the culturally different client
47 CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY The purpose of this study was to explore the kind of institutional support that is being provided to early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty in a Research I University located in the S outheastern part of U.S. A qualitative approach was used to collect and analyze data in this study. This chapter provides the rationale for using this approach, describes the study's epi stemological and theoretical perspectives, researcher subjectivity, and provides an overview of the data collection and analysis methods used. Epistemology and Theoretical Perspective Constructivism and interpretivism are the epistemological and theoretical frameworks employed in carrying out this research. Constructivism, according to Crotty (1998), focuses exclusively on the meaningmaking activity of the individual mind (p. 58), in terms of how individuals interact with objects in the world and mak e sense of them. This was chosen over constructionism which involves the collective generation [and transmission] of meaning (Crotty, 1998, p. 58). Contrasting the two Crotty explains that constructivism tends to resist the critical spirit, while constru ctionism tends to foster it (p. 58). It was felt that the collective generation of meaning may bring to the fore impulses which may not entirely represent the accurate and inner thoughts of the participants of the study. Coconstruction is therefore delib erately negated in an attempt to gain the essence of and to maintain the unique experiences of all participants. The theoretical perspective is the philosophical link that supports and justifies the methodology used to conduct the research. The theoretica l perspective employed for this study is interpretivism, which according to Hatch (2002) attempts to understand and explain human and social reality (p. 67). The study explores how individuals relate to their socialization
48 experiences, and make sense of their work role responsibilities. According to OLeary (2009), new faculty members struggle to bring a balance in their work and family lives, however there are also many who do so successfully. The Setting The university from which the participants wer e selected is an elected member of the Association of American Universities (AAU). The AAU is an organization which consists of sixty three American and Canadian research universities. Participants were selected from a large Southeastern Research I University of the U .S. Participants and Gaining Access A total of six (three male and three female) early career foreign national tenureaccruing faculty members were selected to gain insight into the perceptions and experiences of their newly established roles (Table 43). There was considerable diversity in the group as none of them came from the same country. All the participants had initially come to the U .S to do their Masters and PhD programs. Their ages ranged between 30 to 44 years, time spent in the U .S was 7 to 10 years, and tenure track period varied from 2 months to a year and a half. They were asked to choose their own pseudonyms; some did so while the others left it at the discretion of the researcher. Since any one department did not have many ea rly career tenure accruing professors at the time of the data collection of this study, deliberative (purposive/purposeful) sampling (Creswell, 2008; Oritz, 2003) was conducted to access the participants. This type of sampling is useful when the researcher's objective is to access sites and participants that are information rich (Patton, 1990, p. 169). In order to access relevant participants, the researcher relied heavily on the support of his adviser and fellow graduate student. The researcher also did a thorough search locating probable or eligible assistant professors from the faculty directories of
49 different colleges and departments on the university website sending email requests along with a recruitment letter requesting participation. To conduct the study and gain access to the participants, prior approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) was sought well. The researcher conducted four pilot interviews with tenure accruing assistant professors of the same university and while they responde d favorably to the participation email, they did not meet the selection criteria. However, they were requested to assist by joining in the pilot study, to which they kindly agreed. The purpose of conducting these pilot interviews was to ensure that the employed procedures were appropriate. Through theses interviews the researcher tried to emulate the main study protocol and test the utility of the interview questions as well as the responses that emanated as a consequence. The four foreign nationals who agr eed to participate in these pilot interviews maintained the gender composition of the study in terms of having an equal number of male and female participants. Table 3 1 shows the country of origin of these faculty members and the reason that they were not eligible to participate in the study. Subjectivity Researcher subjectivity is an important aspect of the research process. For quantitative researchers, their goal/aim is to be objective whereas qualitative researchers have opportunities to probe the res earch activity passionately and explore/follow up on all the emerging nuances (Merriam, 1995). According to Merriam subjectivity relates to internal validity, since there are fewer layers between the researcher and the phenomenon under investigation (p. 55). Submerging or engaging closely with the participants in that aspect is therefore not totally undesirable, as long as the researcher employs and fulfills all other conditions of rigor, trustworthiness and dependability. Subjectivity, represents a conne ction between the researcher and the area that he or she is investigating. The researcher of this study was keen to learn the
50 rudiments of the tenure track position in academia, since he himself did not go through such a process. Owing to his length of ser vice in practical management positions, he joined the teaching profession when he was hired in a local university as an associate professor. A year later he was promoted as the department chair of business administration. The position w as not a tenure track appointment; he was not held accountable to specific roles in the triad of teaching, research and service. Although he did play his part in teaching and service, research however, was never a rigorous requirement. The researcher wanted to understand the roles and expectations of a tenure track professor and how individuals shoulder the different roles while balancing their work and personal lives. Another reason for conduct ing this study in a Research I university was to see how faculty perceived and purs ued the rigors of research. As an international student, the researcher can relate to the anxieties and stressors foreign nationals face, which as an insider, proved helpful in probing deeper and gaining insight into participant viewpoints. The researche r us ed his personal experience to expand on certain contexts for the benefit of the reader where participants touched on issues without elaborating on them or avoided them altogether Data Collection The primary source of data collection used for this study was interviews and a survey. Generally speaking, interviews can be of two kinds, i.e., one onone interviews and focus group interviews (Glesne, 2006). The focus group interviews w ould not work well for this study since the idea was to capture unique personal experiences and perceptions of the participants, without hampering, aiding, or redirecting their thoughts through the coconstruction process (Charmaz, 2006; Glesne, 2006). Semi structured individual interviews, considered more appropriate for thi s study, were used in the data collection process. The semi structured interview guide provides
51 considerable latitude (p. 94) in probing more deeply into unique participant experiences and for capturing important details (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998). Effort was made to maintain a nondirective approach to interviewing and to allow the participants to open up freely without feeling restricted and tied to a tight line of inquiry (Glesne, 2006). Glesne also talks about the utility of patiently probing important themes. According to her the interview is a what else and tell me more endeavor (p. 96), which eases the interviewee to elaborate on areas that he or she is sensitive to. The author stresses this point by saying that rush and the world rushes with you (p. 96), thereby denying the opportunity of deeper penetration on central issues. The six participants were interviewed twice. Most of the interviews were conducted in the participants offices. Only one interview was carried out over lunch at a neighboring restaurant. The first set of interviews ranged between 45 to 60 minutes, while the following set of interviews varied between 25 to 50 minutes. All the interviews were audio taped, after obtaining informed consent from the participants. During the i nterviews, field notes were taken to record important nuances as well as keeping the interviews on track (Poland, 1995). The interviews were transcribed verbatim to capture and explore the themes that emerged from rich thick data sources (Merriam, 1995). T he researcher transcribed the interviews in order to compare them with his field notes and learn things about the informants, the substance of the interview, and [researcher] as interviewer that will be missed in the transcript alone (Hatch, 2002, p. 113 ). At the end of the first interview the participants were asked to complete a brief survey. Some of them chose to fill it out immediately while others brought it back on the day of the second interview.
52 Data Analysis The data analysis methodology that drives this study is grounded theory. The grounded theory uses the inductive approach (which relies on observations to develop understandings, processes, laws and protocols), and ultimately aims for construction of substantive and formal theory (Grbich, 2 007, p. 71). This methodology suits the study since the design of this research was to find information and themes emerging from the data generated through participant inputs. Grbich (2007) also supports the use of grounded theory for this study by saying that the approach is best used for small scale environments and micro activity where little previous research has occurred (p. 71). The methodology combined pattern of Glasers 1992 and St r ausss 1995 models (Grbich, 2007). This form involves a constant comparison approach between words, lines, sections incidents to incidents, and incidents to emerging concepts (p. 72), which are useful in conceptualizing themes (Grbich, 2007). The axial coding approach based on the Strauss 1995 model was used simultaneously whereby the categories emerging from open coding were grouped together, either under an in vivo caption or through self generated terminologies, representing them as core or axial codes. Validity and reliability were crucial considerations while conducting this research. Golafshani (2003) posits that validity and reliability are predominantly rooted in the positivist perspective and their applicability needs to be redefined for the purpose of qualitative investigations. Hoepful (1997) discusses the same and provide s comparatives to the terms employed under the conventional or quantitative approach as shown in table 32: In order to ensure reliability i.e., dependability and consistency in this qualitative study, audit trail and peer examination st rategies were employed Merriam, 1995). An a udit trail was incorporated to describe in detail the various steps of data collection, coding and decision
53 making processes. T o conduct peer examination, the researcher requested that research colleagues look at the data for confirming the plausibility of themes and findings (Merriam, 1995). The fact that the participants of this study were selected from different university departments may enhance the dependability of findings (Merriam, 1995). The use of member checks increase d the internal validity of research (Merriam, 1995). At the end of the interviews, the participants were sent electronic transcripts for interviews so that they could read them and make track changes where appropriate. This helped ensure the accuracy of transcripts and themes that emerged from the data, and authenticated that the findings so that participant views were not misinterpreted. External validity was enhanced by creating rich thick descriptions through detailed interviews and trans criptions for the reader to consider transferring findings to other locations matching the research institution (Merriam, 1995). According to Glesne (2006), thick description goes beyond the mere or bare reporting of an act (thin description), but descri bes and probes the intentions, motives, meanings, contexts, situations and circumstances of action (p. 27). The data compiled in the form of transcripts were first coded manually and then imported into the qualitative software program NVivo for an additi onal independent coding process. Considering that this data analysis was an individual effort, this two stage coding process provided the needed triangulation for the analysis. Comparing the manual and the electronic code generation and arriving at a conse nsus finalized the themes. Considering the vast variety of information which was found in the form of themes, codes and references; many of these were collapsed, expanded or coalesced as consistent with conducting qualitative reporting. Some of the themes retained their original headings while some
54 were merged and emanated in the form of axial codes. All themes or tree nodes receiving less than 3 sources were removed as being less representative of the participant pool. After a further investigation, relev ant themes relating directly to the research questions were chosen in an attempt to narrow down the focus of analysis.
55 Table 3 1. Pilot interviews (Tenure accruing professors not meeting study eligibility criteria) # M/F Pseudonym Native country Item not meeting eligibility criteria Department employed 1 F Dr. Enid Kenya Was in the 5 th year of tenure track Construction 2 M Dr. Archer U.K. Teaching was not a tenure track responsibility Agriculture 3 M Dr. Mangal India Teaching was not a tenure track responsibility Agriculture 4 F Dr. Monayya Yugoslavia Completed mid term review before the first interview Anthropology
56 Table 3 2. Comparison of c onventional and naturalistic t erms for r eliability and validity Conventional terms Naturalistic terms I nternal validity Credibility External validity Transferability Reliability Dependability Objectivity Confirmability
57 CHAPTER 4 RESEARCH FINDINGS This chapter will focus on the analysis of the themes and findings that emerged through the two stage inte rview process, supported by a brief survey that each interviewee was asked to complete between the two interviews. In the first interview as many as five themes and 32 tree nodes including 1343 references were generated by the six participants (Table 41). In the follow up interview with participants surfaced another n ine themes and 20 tree nodes covering 537 references (Table 4 2). Some of these themes were the same as those from the first interview. Probing deeper into the information received in the firs t interview helped to further develop these themes. Results of the participants' survey is presented in Table 4 4. Themes The organization of this chapter has been structured in harmony with the research questions framed in chapter one which are reproduced as follows: Research question 1. How do early career foreign national faculty perceive the socialization processes in Research I universities ? Research question 1A) What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of teaching ? Research question 1B) What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of research? Research question 1C) What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of service? Research question 1D) What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of unspoken expectations?
58 Selected thematic constructions relating to the above research prompts are: 1) choosing the professoriate; 2) selecting th e Research I University ; 3) socialization processes in the university, college, and department; 4) faculty socialization perceptions; 5) information and communication on teaching; 6) information and communication on research; 7) information and communication on service; 8) factors influencing time spent on teaching; 9) factors influencing time spent on research; 10) factors influencing time spent on service; 11) unspoken or unclear expectations; 12) stated policies and personal experiences, 13) faculty evaluations. In this chapter, first, the following theme s (1 4) relating to the socialization processes in Research I universities are examined: 1) choosing the professoriate 2) selecting the Research I University 3) socialization processes in the university, college, and department 4) faculty socialization pe rceptions; second, themes (510) addressing the perceptions of the expectation of teaching, research, and service are presented: 5) information and communication on teaching 6) information and communication on research 7) information and communication on service 8) factors influencing time spent on teaching 9) factors influencing time spent on research 10) factors influencing time spent on service and third, themes (1113) relating to the perceptions of unspoken expectations are expressed:
59 11) unspoken or unclear expectations 12) stated policies and personal experiences 13) faculty evaluations Before examining the themes it would be useful to review the research participant profiles on Table 4 3 because aspects like gender; country of origin; length of time in the U .S .; and length of time spent in the tenure track position, can play a considerable part in the socialization process and may have a bearing on their perceptions and expectations Research Question 1. How do early career foreign national facul ty perceive the socialization processes in Research I universities? Choosing P rofessoriate The researcher sought to understand why foreign nationals chose to take on the field of the professoriate, and for that matter in the U .S. Most of them were positive about the profession and for working on research. Dr. Brazil mentioned that he did not come to the U .S specifically to become a professor. The choice evolved while he was doing an externship at UC Davis in 2001 as a requirement for finishing veterinary school in Brazil. Working on research motivated him to pursue a career in academia. I came to the U .S and I started working on research and really fell in love with it. So after graduation I came back to the U .S to do an internship and then I was accepted for residency and then did a m aster s things sort of snowballed from my first experience here. So I realized that I wanted to stay in academia Like Dr. Brazil, Dr. Choi came here only for her studies. However, finding that she liked the environm ent, she developed a longer term association with higher education. She declared that once I started to study in the states, my aim changed to become a professor I thought about (nothing) other than teaching I now have a passion for teaching and I do love research.
60 For Dr. Hayek it was also research that motivated him to enter the professoriate. He conveyed his interest in aquaculture and fisheries and mentioned that even during his studies he was involved in a lot of research. He went on to say, I have had success with publishing papers and doing research in aquaculture, national resource economics. So, it is definitely the way my career has been oriented from the beginning and I really enjoyed that a lot, i.e., the research component. Dr. Roys m ain motivation for completing a PhD was that she wanted an academic job in the U .S because she liked teaching and this intellectual environment. She found taking such a position here to be more lucrative than back home. She never wanted to become a profes sor in India because the salaries were extremely low. She explained, I just dont like this profession so much that I can be that poor and be happy, For Dr. Illa joining the profession was a bit of a surprise. She came here for her m aster s degree, howev er, she mentioned, In my second year I started working on my research with my adviser, we just worked out so well, that I decided to stay for the PhD and work with her. I knew I liked research but I didnt come into the profession as a teacher. Although when I started teaching I liked it a lot . and now I like teaching. Dr. Peja was more certain as he said, I love to teach and I love my research . . I knew I wanted to work in academia. I just didnt know where. It is clear that most of them liked the environment After having braved the initial shock and awe of first coming to the U .S as students, they want ed to carry on and settle into, still to many outsiders, the land of opportunities. At least three of the participants, from India, Korea, and Columbia indicated that they did not expect similar pay/growth opportunities on return to their countries. Moreover since most of them were in their 30s, it would have meant a fresh start for them anywhere and the returns, both short and long term, may have appeared better for them in the U .S.
61 Selecting the Research I University This second theme provides insight as to why the early career foreign nationals chose their current Research I University and what determined this choice. Dr. Brazil suggeste d that this was more of a career choice, to get into the tenure track profession. The tenure track position attracted him because he liked research He said, After finishing my PhD in Cornell University, I took a position as a clinician at the Ohio state u niversity as an assistant professor but on nontenure track, clinical track, and this position here opened . and things worked out . . Dr. Brazil was doing a lot of research during his PhD and that helped him make this decision as well. He already knew a faculty member here with whom he had collaborated. He liked the work, the climate, and the fact that this Research I University worked with a lot of dairies and well bread cows. Dr. Choi, explained that while she had applied to six universitie s her p r e sent one was the first where she interviewed and got the job. When I came here for interview I had a very good impression from the department, other colleagues . it was most perfect for me at that moment. They needed someone to teach the carb ohydrate metabolism and basically in this department they are majoring something else like a different nutrient [and] they needed someone who could really teach that. So it is really in my interest and their interest so . . It took a lot longer in th e case of Dr. Hayek to find a university of his choice. He expounded, When I finished my PhD in University of Rhode Island, I applied for many jobs like this one here. There was no position here [but] there was one in Miami. Although he was offered the position in Miami, the university later cancelled it due to the economic crises. Dr. Hayek later got a United Nations job in Rome. He worked there for a couple of years but kept applying for a position in a Research I University until he was hired here. He was the
62 only participant who elaborated on the factors that lead to his appointment at current university. He explained, The reason they made the offer to me to come here wasnt so much for teaching. It was because I have capabilities to do research. Befo re my interview one of the papers from my dissertation was accepted in the best journal in our field. It is really tough to publish there, so when I applied here I [told them that] I submitted the paper to this journal. Then I came here for the interview a nd [told them] that the paper actually got accepted. They went like 'wow thats perfect', and two days later I had the offer, and I know it was because of that paper. Dr. Roy explained this was her first interview and she was offered the position. I liked the department, I came here, I liked the people . it was too good an offer to pass up. It is a big Research I University and that already brings a lot of perks which a lot of people have to struggle for. When Dr. Illa applied for a job she had two ca mpus interviews and one offer for a post doc. Apart from her current university she received another offer from Syracuse University. She got the acceptance first from her present university. She mentioned that she liked it better, the town is nicer here a nd it is closer to cities. I work in bilingualism, the department is nice, and it has a lot of participants here. She concluded by saying that the university is known to pay badly, to pay less than other universities, . . S yracuse is a private university, pays well, but I like this department more and I thought the possibilities were better here. Dr. Peja applied in two places, worked as a professor for two years in Mexico for a center of research in mathematics. He and his wife did not like that environment. He explained, Previously we had the experience of living six years in Idaho, it was very nice. We felt much better in an environment like that of a U .S university which is more open and accommodating than the one in Mexico. He mentioned tha t when the opportunity came, he applied for his present U .S Research I University and was very happy to receive an offer. Although he did not say this, it was clear that the preference for moving to a U .S university would also include factors like secur ity, so important for foreign nationals, as well as the cultural adjustment owing
63 to the diversity that is available and respected here. Most participants talked about their passion for research. That is another reason why these faculty members had a preference of staying and working in U .S research universities. Most of them mentioned that they did not have much of a research environment, or the kind of support available here back in their countries. S ocialization Process in the University, College, a nd Department In this section participants conceptualization of socialization is discussed. They described socialization in a variety of ways, ranging from learning the ropes to getting along with the faculty. They were given a generalized definition of socialization (appendix B) so as to give them some idea without narrowing their stream of thought. They expressed their views on the socialization processes taking place in the university, college, and the department. University The participants did not have much to share regarding university socialization. Some of them mentioned attending one orientation session. Most of them explained that this session dealt with insurance and policies regarding retirement among others. The views were mixed. For Dr. Ill a it was focused mostly on university policies and regulations, she said, They give you a university orientation at the beginning of the first year but I couldnt even attend the whole thing. They tell you about the policies, forms and the things that you have to do, things like sexual harassment training, privacy of student grades. I think more, like, to protect their backs legally, just to make sure and in a way make us more responsible, because we know, we read all the pages the first day, the first week we were here. And we signed that we learned all this, so it was more legal than actually practical for us. She also mentioned about a party at the Presidents house that surprisingly none of the others referred to. Dr. Choi found out about the universit y orientation after two weeks in the office and she said it was of no use by that time. She attended a teaching support workshop, which the others did not talk about. The others did not find the university orientation useful but
64 stated that it did provide an opportunity to meet the other new hires. Dr Roy said the only good thing about that session was that she made a wonderful friend there. Perhaps the nature of the orientation content and a lack of ongoing formal opportunities limit the possibilities for making connections and networking socially. College Dr. Brazil did not have much to offer about the College socialization. He could not differentiate between the two when he said, I dont think we had anything at the college or university level yet. I dont know what those would be, maybe the graduation, theyll be at the college level and Ill participate in that. But university level, maybe thats university level. Dr. Choi said that she did not feel too comfortable going to any College meetings as s he did not know anyone there. She received an invitation once or twice but did not attend. The researcher can relate to this. In the individualistic culture of the U .S while there is general courtesy extended everywhere, one does not form linkages or alli ances too easily. One has to be very social to do this, something most foreign nationals even if they are so in their own cultures, avoid being due to the uncertainty of responses. When the researcher joined the graduate school,he used to look forward to meetings and receptions initially, but after not making any close or lasting acquaintances there,he eventually gave up. Dr. Peja mentioned that the Dean invited us all in the beginning of the semester of the academic year to a dinner and we had to intro duce ourselves and he talked to us. We were like eight people or so and that was it. Dr. Roy stated that although there were no formal meetings, technically you could have a lot of interaction at this level since they encouraged interdepartmental associat ion. She mentioned, I dont have projects that are interdepartmental. I can see potentially thats possible but I havent had any experience so
65 far, so I really dont know people from other departments. Dr. Hayek and Dr. Illa both were travelling and mis sed the only college meeting that they were invited to. Department All the participants talked about departmental meetings, both formal and informal, not everyone however, showed the same passion towards their attendance though. Dr. Brazil expounded, Wel l yeah the socialization depends. There are the departmental meetings which I never attend, cause usually I have a farm visit. He mentioned that the departmental meetings are on Tuesdays and he was usually out working that day. Even if he was not on a fi eld visit, he still had work to do, so I dont take time to go to the department meeting and that doesnt count for, you dont earn points for being there at the meetings. This two hour long meeting takes place once a month. Dr. Brazil obviously did not consider it important to attend as he said two hours are too many . . I can make better use of my time than being there . He said he would attend if there was something important like taking a vote or something, not just structural issues. He thought he would participate more when he got involved in administration, and he was specifically needed to attend those meetings. He mentioned that there are end of the year parties, when someone retires or other gatherings and he tried to attend those. He also talked about the meetings specific to his service section comprising five faculty members, two residents and one intern. He did not look forward to attending those either, yeah so we have a meeting every week just for our service area every Friday morni ng, which I dont find very useful, but I cannot run away, I have to attend those. He found the meetings to be just too long. Dr. Choi did not think too much of the department parties and mentioned that there were a couple of department parties like Thanksgiving or Christmas or celebrating student achievements or something. She mentioned that she had been with the department for five
66 months and she was hoping to have her first faculty meeting towards the end of the month. She thought this may become regular once they have their permanent department chair. She however was quite critical of how departments tried to orient their new faculty members, which she thought was totally different form Korea, I am from Korea maybe it is more the Asian culture as f or us when we have the new faculty member the department has a little party for the new people or it can be college or university based. Every semester or New Year the newly hired faculty has a meeting together and they give the information on what is important for them. I dont see any of those specific meetings prepared in the United States, so that might be a little cultural difference. I am a foreign faculty, but any faculty once here would have struggled because you know the first day I was here I don t know where should I park my car, and that information wasnt there or where should I make a Gator 1. So yeah when new person comes whether the faculty, staff or any new students, I mean a proper orientation is needed. So if I started with miserable condi tions, it takes a while to cover up. Like almost one month I struggled a lot to getting a proper documentation for the lab safety. I mean there is no certain packet that you need to do this, this and this and I googled everything, oh I need to do this and this, and the mentoring committees are formed later. I mean it has formed finally so if it had happened earlier they would have given better guidance. I would be faster, but you know. Korea is number five in the top collectivist nations. Dr. Choi obviously felt that more should have been done ,to assist in adjusting to the U.S. university as the experiences from her country suggested. The warmth and affection in that culture makes you feel at home in a very short time. People are helpful, are more forthcoming with their help and no one feels that to be a violation of space. In this culture one feels like doing things alone. People who have spent much of their time in the collectivist culture need a lot of time to come to terms with individualistic culture of the U .S. She also mentioned that her department had two sections. She said, I dont know the food science people, I mean we are in the same building. I dont know whos who, so it is kind of sad.
67 Dr. Hayek mentioned attending one departmental party f our months after he joined. The department had a formal meeting once a month, which the chair participated occasionally. He stated that, once in a while I have lunch with the guys around. He found his department chair to be very nice. Dr. Hayek had been having some family issues, and the department chair tried to comfort him by inviting him to his house for dinner. Dr. Hayek shared, People are very nice here . every time if I have problem, I would call anyone and they would help me at once with something, so I have no problems it is just that everybody is so busy. I do talk to that girl in the next room we dont have lunch as often as we should but we are gonna do it more often later. Dr. Hayek mentioned that the department actually had a social comm ittee. He said, Sometimes I go to their activities, sometimes I am really busy and I cannot. They do, like the Friday of every month they get together, the faculty. For instance the other day they had this NCAA basketball tournament. They got together on M onday like half an hour to talk about it. And I think thats important, actually I think it is really good. Dr. Illa mentioned that she met a lot of people right from the first week she was here. She had a meeting, first with the four people in her area i n linguistics, and then with the people in the whole department. She mentioned, we have faculty meetings every month and we had the department party at the beginning of the semester . and then when you are doing service in different committees you get to work closer with people in other areas. Talking about the older faculty members she mentioned that they were very nice I have gone to talk to them or for coffee and then they have good advice for me and they are very supportive. She mentioned that e very Friday at 5pm faculty and students met, talked, had beer and socialized. Dr. Roy mentioned, we have our department things, like we have this picnic coming up this Saturday and then they have the happy hour where you can go meet other faculty
68 once a month. She also talked about the Christmas party last year, monthly faculty meetings, and her steering committee meeting. When asked if she was introduced to the people in the department when she joined, she shared No I was not, I dont know why our depa rtment doesnt do it, but they dont do it. But later on they did it for the other two people who came after me, over a cup of tea. She mentioned that since there was a lot of female faculty in the department, she initiated the womens lunch, which was going fine. She concluded, So there are possibilities of interaction but you know it is still an individualistic approach, so I just think it is just the way the profession is. It is not really that easy. Faculty Socialization Perceptions All the early ca reer foreign national faculty members involved in this research have lived in the U .S between 7 to 11 years (Table 43). One can therefore expect them to have developed a deeper understanding and better response system to the socialization process. In the following section, the faculty members talk about their socialization or what their expectations are on how it will unfold or evolve over time. Dr. Choi, having spent over ten years in the U .S suggested that she knew what socializing was like here. Howe ver, it appeared that she encountered certain situations and became critical of particular types of interactions. She said, I have been here almost 10 years before I took this job, so I am pretty much familiar with the environment, like what does the party means and when Americans smile it is not exactly smile inside. Yeah I was smart enough to distinguish you know formal acting versus you know . . On joining the Research I University she related the following experience comparing it to that of her ho me country Korea. There when a new hir ing was made such as that of a new professor, a post doc or graduate, everything was ready and everyone was friendly to help
69 him or her become part of their faculty. In contrast she reported her experience, But when I first got here, no computer was ready and the door was locked and nobody was really, you know, whenever I asked they are friendly to guide me but it was not given as a package you should do this. I figured that out, oh, this is my survival game When a sk ed, if after 10 years she was in a position to adjust to this culture, she mentioned, well not completely . but at least I am not getting embarrassed or something yeah, I am getting used to it. She shared how her husband could not completely settle i n the U S despite the time spent here. His F2 visa did not allow him work options and he could do nothing but to look after the children and the house. She mentioned that it was not easy to even share her successes, like going on a conference or getting published, with him since those did not mean much to him and could only have aggravated his miseries. While talking about gender and the professoriate, she thought it was quite equitable in the U .S. She stated, In the Asian society, they still prefer th e male over the female professor . . Yes, I mean I think actually it is worse in Korea. I mean thats one of the reasons I dont want to go back to Korea. Dr. Hayek, explained that he was quite familiar with the American system because although he had been here only five months he had lived in the U .S for 11 years as university student or as a research assistant. He mentioned that her spouse did not think of it that way and was not getting along well with the U .S culture, customs, and environment at all. He mentioned that they were having regular disputes and thought that the marriage would not last very long since he could not leave the U .S and his job, and she would not have any of it. I t was clear that he was having serious concerns at home tha t did not provide enough chances for open socialization. He mentioned that he was from Columbia (the second most collectivist country according to Spring, 2008), where people ha ve very strong, close ties and relationships, and his
70 wife was having problems accepting and getting along in the individualistic U .S culture. Dr. Roy did not think that there would have been any difference in socialization in a U .S research institution irrespective of the cultural aspec t. She was not certain what they could do t o make it better, . because even if I was not Indian, suppose I was American and I had moved here, I would have to go through the same thing right, I have no friends, I have to start. She however, quickly added that it helped one to be long to her pl ace of origin i.e., India, . it might be easier for me because I at least have the option of calling India club. I immediately would get to know so many people. Of course I never exercised that option but I have that option. She thought that it rela ted more with the amount of discretionary time that faculty members had than on culture, I am not sure if it has something to do with being from different culture . once you start working and especially if you are in academics it is harder to make fri ends or to assimilate because you know everybody does their own thing and time is a constraint. However she continued and began to explain the warmth and closeness of collectivist societies such as India in comparison with the individualistic U .S society Unlike in the U .S where you can only call one or two, even in serious emergencies, in India you have a whole bunch. Even if there is somebody you dont know very well, you can call them and theyll actually come. I guess you do feel lonely because you are used to, you know, certain kinds of friends and this life is pretty lonely. In terms of teaching she thought that networking and connections were easier to make in the case of American faculty. They can connect with students faster because they have th e same cultural context. She found that they shared the same stories and humor, which can make teaching and learning so much fun. In her opinion it is harder to create the same connections with students otherwise. While talking about socialization as a fa culty, Dr. Illa mentioned that Americans used family as an excuse for work and lately she had started us ing similar communications to avoid
71 work related events. . . I am learning you know, if professors cant go to dinner because they have children, you know I cant go to dinner because I have friends, gym or other social commitments. Dr. Brazil felt quite comfortable with the socialization in his Research I University He said, Theres a lot of interaction between students and colleagues . of c ourse it makes it easier if, you know, if you can understand the culture in seniors and all that. I t is not strictly work, you have friendship as well . . Dr. Peja felt that people were friendlier in the U S compared to the university that he was part of in Mexico H e thought that he was better off here due to the larger Chilean community. B oth Dr. Illa and Dr. Roy hinted that there was not much encouragement from the senior management for faculty members to interact. One may wonder whether the reason was to provide more time to the faculty to ta ckle their multifaceted responsibilities, or was it in support of the universitys sexual harassment and other policies. It is apparent that most participants talked about socialization in general terms rath er than with respect to their responsibilities in the university. The majority showed their satisfaction although the researcher could tell that they did not compare it favorably to the socialization that they could expect in their home environments. Anot her reason may be that with the passage of time spent in the U .S these participants had grown used to the comparatively less hospitable environment thus they began to have lower expectations and feel more accepting. Research Question 1 A What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of teaching? All of the faculty members included in this study were recently inducted in academia. They appeared confident at performing their responsibilities relating to teaching and resear ch. This was determined through the responses that participants gave on the brief
72 survey instrument which was provided to them to complete between interview 1 and 2 (Table 4 4) Other information i.e., time allocated to the responsibilities of teaching, re search, and service, as well as the type, length, frequency, and prep time required per class taught was also revealed in the ir survey responses. I nformation and Communication on Teaching Most of the faculty members mentioned that the information and comm unication on teaching was very clear, and there was no confusion as to what and how much one had to teach. Dr. Brazil said, Well teaching is a small component for now. The department pretty much tells you what you are gonna be doing, so it is mostly clini cal and service component. He further mentioned that the head of his department told him that he does not want him coordinating any courses. He also explained that he participated in three courses in addition to all of the invited lectures that were expected, usually every month, and that he participated in the courses that he had expertise on. Dr. Choi mentioned that she is responsible for 40% teaching and 60% research, however she was a little bemused with th ose percentages. She said that they remained the same, i.e., whether she was teaching two classes or three or doing more or less research When asked if there was any specific guidance that she was getting on teaching, she explained that I think it is based on what I want and thus I heard there is pretty much freedom on what I want to do in class E ven if there is a previous format, I dont need to exactly follow what they did before. While talking about teaching information, Dr. Hayek, mentioned that this was his first semester and for now he was doing around 9 8% teaching and 2% service. He had the expectation that this actually was going to change. He was hoping that by Fall it will change
73 to 85% teaching, 5% service, and 10% research. He had consulted with the department chair and had received his consent to increase his work on research and gradually reduce the teaching component. He mentioned that this first year is a transition year, I am teaching now some undergrad classes but I have to be teaching masters level class and some PhD classes. He was teaching two new classes for this first semester but the expectation was that he would continue to repeat the same classes at least for the foreseeable future. Dr. Illa explained that her teaching load of two courses a semester had remained unchanged since she joined the department a year and a half ago and did not expect that to change soon. She said, the expectation is to teach two courses a semester and so long as my evaluations are good enough, I am fine with teaching. She was getting good guidance on teaching from the department chair and another colleague. She also mentioned that she was being observed by this colleague once a semester, and was receiving feedback on things such as m aking sure that all students were engaged in the class activ ities rather than having only a few participate Dr. Roy mentioned, about teaching they are very clear, they told me what course I had to teach, what is my course load, what it will be in first two years and it was clear to me from the beginning. When asked if t his load will change with time, she explained, For most people it only increases, unless you become full professor then you are in a position to say no. Factors Influencing Time Spent on Teaching According to Dr. Brazil, the department decided the time allocation for his teaching. He stated that while there was some wiggle room in establishing time allocations, however, . you cant come to teach and decide to do research, or you cant come to research and decide to just teach or just do cl inics. When asked if he needed more time in the beginning
74 for preparing new courses etc. h e expounded, No for me, my time budget follows strictly, and I dont have a big teaching component. Dr. Choi was about to start her teaching in the ensuing semest er. Although she was fortunate to get the syllabus and course packet from a previous faculty member, she dreaded the experience. Dr. Choi mentioned that she would be spending a lot of time in preparation since everything would be fresh for her. She expecte d that she would be putting in at least 10 hours, for teaching a three hour class. She hoped the time spent in preparation would decrease with practice, and for repeat future courses. Dr. Hayek said that the class size can play a part in the time spent fo r grading exams and assignments. Although he thought that part of those responsibilities would be covered by the teaching assistants, he still felt that it was a lot of work He revealed, Sometimes I have to spend some weekends you know just grading, even though I have some help and assistance but we have to divide everything. He is teaching two courses. For one course he ha s to prepare five hours for a 50 minute class since it is new for him. The other one which is a 95 minute class need s four hours of his time. He has five 50 minute classes and two 95 minute classes, and as such he feels that all of his time is currently going into teaching. He maintains that in the tenure track there are other things that are going on and one has to allocate for those t oo. He talked about this transition In January I was a little bit overwhelmed like it was like oh my God the classes and I didnt have experience teaching classes but over time I am feeling better now. So, in addition to the classes and for things that I have to do here, and I have a conference today at one, because we have to make a decision. So it is things like that that always keep me busy and typically over the weekends. I t is getting better overtime, but I have to do their [students] homework or pr epare for one class or read those papers for the competition. There is always something going on . like I have this invitation Friday next week like a teacher appreciation dinner of one sorority.
75 Dr. Illa mentioned that there is a constant pressure on teaching in the early days of the tenure track position, So normally there are deadlines, you know when you are teaching, you have to teach so you have to have the class ready. For grading you get a little more time . I devote a lot of time for teach ing. This semester I am teaching two undergrad classes, but they are both new, so I have to create all the Power Points, exams everything, it takes me a lot of time to create those Power Points but I hope I get to teach the class again and then all that wi ll be done. She laughed as she said that there has to be a time when they would not be able to give her a class that she had not taught before. She was in fact really looking forward to teaching in Summer when she will have a repeat class and that will all ow her to devote more time to research. She mentioned that it was taking her three to four hours to prepare for just one class and she was teaching six classes a week. She did not think that her teaching requirements would be reduced at least in the next t wo years. Dr. Peja mentioned that the time for teaching depended very much for him on the kind of topic he was teaching. In Statistics there are variable preparation times, there are some harder topics than others, and that determines how much time I w ould spend on teaching. Dr. Roy mentioned that, when I am teaching, more emphasis and more time is spent on teaching, but when I am not teaching my entire focus is on research. For her it is very important that she tries to give equal time to both area s. She wants to devote time to research even when she is overburdened with teaching. She thinks that if she lets research slip away in the initial years, she will not be able to catch up with the tenure requirements later. What she is finding daunting is c lass sizes of around 120 students. She mentioned that she used to get exhausted preparing for her classes in the first semester. She is feeling a lot better teaching the same course a second time around to a class of a similar size. I am not that
76 much ner vous anymore because I have all the material, I kn o w it really well, so that could be it. She is hoping to start teaching graduate classes soon which will mean teaching small class sizes of 15 to 20 students. It was surprising to note that despite having very strong accents some of the participants mentioned that they did not have any problems in classes and that students did not take up any language issues with them. Only Dr. Roy from India mentioned that some students found her accent difficult to pick at times However, she dismissed it as a practical joke. She added that I know Indians speak English well T hey have a very different accent, but I speak quite clearly, and students should not have any problem understanding me. The researcher could unde rstand her speech well enough being another Asian himself however, he found her accent to be quite strong and a little over powering for n onAsians students to comprehend easily Research Question 1 B What are early career foreign national faculty percept ions of the expectation of research? Information and Communication on Research According to Dr. Brazil despite the time allocation fixed by the department, You have some wiggle room to decide where do you want to focus more . . However, he pointed out that there is an expectation that you do some research. In regards to collaboration on research he mentioned, I know everybody and these faculty are very active faculty, they want to be involved in writing proposals and grants, they want to collaborat e and thats really priceless. Dr. Choi indicated that she was receiving pressure to get an NIH RO 1 grant. She explained that "RO1 grant is like almost $250,000 per year for 5 years, it is a really big grant. Not right away but before I get tenure I ne ed to get the RO 1 to secure my tenure.
77 Dr. Hayek opined that although he was doing virtually 100% teaching for now, he would gradually tilt his efforts towards research work. The department actually needed to increase the number of publications per year and he saw himself as the one to shoulder that responsibility. He thought the onus was on him since he was hired based on the number of publications he had at the time of appointment. He was certain that Summer onwards he will be doing full time research. He went on to say, Actually we have clear expectations, I have the file somewhere like I am supposed to get three publications per year, something like that. He was hoping that if he could achieve that mark, teaching would reduce to just two courses dur ing Fall semester which would fulfill his total teaching commitment for the whole year. Dr. Illa thought that the research expectations were a little vague, they dont tell you how many, they never give you a number or they dont tell you what journals c ount more. She went on to say, people are like . get two top journal publications . ." She continued, "is that enough or if they are not top journals how many of, you know, average journal publications do you need to count as one, but nobody gives you a clear number. She expounded that with time she is realizing the importance of doing things that count towards tenure, We are organizing a conference and I am so happy because thats [going to] count. Before I didnt use to think, normally I will think this is a project, and you dont think in advance how many papers are [going to] come out of it . ." In her second year Dr. Illa was realizing that she needed to start thinking more practically about choosing projects that would come out sooner over the projects that she might find more interesting to do. She mentioned that this "is a little sad for me. I prefer just doing for the value of the research, but in a way you are pushed towards being productive." She mentioned that this fear of what counts or not, is too confusing and adds to the
78 stress of an early career faculty member. She elaborated and described how she went to a much pursued conference in her field where the entry is very tough but the proceedings are not peer reviewed. Referring to a journal she pointed out, "it is good to publish there so that the other people that are important in the field get to know your work, but at the same time my department would think that publication in this [journal] doesnt count for anything." She f elt that other departments have more people that give them feedback on their papers and she did not have anyone. Last year I applied for a grant and I sent it to my mentor but he simply said he could not really give comments, without assigning a reason. Dr. Roy mentioned that while research comprised 40% of her efforts, she spent equal time on both teaching and research since she thought both were equally important. She further conveyed that her department expect ation was very precise as it anticipated 10 articles by the time a professor went up for tenure. . i f you dont have them you are not gonna get tenure, thats what is communicated. She mentioned that this expectation was now clearer to her than it was in the beginning because it was like wh at if you publish in higher quality journals . now apparently I realized that it really doesnt matter, they just need the numbers. So, that understanding took about a year and a half to get through to me. Factors Influencing Time Spent on Research D r. Brazil mentioned how he allocated his time for teaching, research, and service, for me my time budget follows strictly. He is expected to put in 50% of his time on research and diligently tries to do that. He thinks he is in a fine shape by collaborat ing with his seniors and mentors, and is right on track writing for journals, and grants. It is clear that he is very organized and uses time efficiently. He mentioned that he wakes up every day at 6 am and if he needs to start early to do service or start a project he has no problems with
79 waking up earlier. He puts in the required hours in the office but leaves at 5pm sharp to spend time with family. For Dr. Choi who recently joined the department, it has taken a couple of months to put things on track. S he has now set up her research unit after getting the research assistants that she wanted in her lab. She is responsible for research equivalent to 60% of her time. She feels that although there is no clear way to judge what determines 60%, the mere fact t hat she has a high expectation in research will guide her in spending a lot of time in research once she develops a fair competence in teaching. In the first interview, Dr. Hayek reported that he was almost spending his total time on teaching; however he is very conscious of his responsibility to the department in taking a lead on research publications. He maintains that he will make it a point to utilize Summer semesters exclusively for research and is trying to make his chair accept his request to work next Spring also fully on research. He seems desperate to make up for lost time. Dr. Illa mentioned that deadlines determine the amount of time she spends on research or teaching. She thought that the problem with research was that you normally dont have so many deadlines unless it is a conference. You do not have a deadline for writing a paper for a journal. That is why sometimes it gets pushed to second in priority. Like Dr. Hayek, she also finds Summer to be a good time to catch up on research. She me ntioned, During the year I collect data, I work with students, we go to conferences and try to create new material. I think the bulk of the writing happens in Summer, thats when it is easier to write. Once she gets the writing part done, the deadlines o f editing and getting it published take over for her. She figures opting for qualitative research also makes it takes longer to publish because she has to think about what she wants to do and how, get IRB
80 approval, recruit participants, collect and analyze the data. She stated that, "Writing the paper in the end is the easy part, the least painful of the steps. Dr. Peja mentioned, I try to set apart one and a half day of the week exclusively for research. He showed similar intentions for Summer as some o f the other faculty, I am going to dedicate it [Summer] exclusively for research. I wouldnt be doing anything else, not even teaching. I have this in the package that they give you like a start up grant money package. I have put money aside for myself there so I dont have to teach, and so I can work entirely and exclusively on research. Dr. Roy mentioned that when she is teaching she invests more time on teaching but when she is not teaching, her entire focus is on research, for her research is not something that you can ever put aside. Research Question 1 C What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of service? Information and Communication on Service The service component for Dr. Brazil stands at 45%. Dr Brazil explained that he goes out to the farms and provides service to the dairy clients. Service for him therefore has a different connotation, whereby rather than within the department, he has to provide it to external users. He explained that he has to go out and do research, . what I learn in that research, I go and prepare like short courses for producers or employees, so that I can transfer that knowledge and I have to do that as well. While there is a fixed allocation of time for service, what he does in service is not tightly controlled. He can choose his own service program as long as he is facilitating the companies and employees in his main field of dairy. Dr. Choi has not completed the first six months on the job. Since she has not had any departmenta l communication about, she does not know what to expect in service. She stated
81 that, . presently [I] dont have any dedicated time to serve . so currently I dont know about service much. Dr. Hayek also is more or less at the same period into t he profession as Dr. Choi but he started with a small service component. He mentioned that the service expectation is in the range of 5% for now. He is certain this will change, although until Fall this year it will stay the same. He is currently shoulderi ng service responsibilities by serving on the graduate student committee, and a search committee. Now in her second year, Dr. Illa seemed very clear about her service responsibilities, although she is also doing just 5% of service. Talking about what she expected in the future she mentioned presently she is on a few committees and expects to be on more, . as time passes by, so, and I will be doing more service. Hopefully they hire more people, but if they dont hire anybody else soon, this is gonna be it. Dr. Roy said that she does not have any service requirements at this point although in the previous semester she took nine applicants shortlisted by the search committee to lunch and dinner engagements. Talking about service she did not think sitting on dissertation committees was service, she said, I dont think so, I am not sure but I dont think so. Thats what you are expected to as a faculty. She then described what she thought service for her was, you have to serve in committees for the dep artment, . committees for research, teachings, so thats part of service and then sometimes you have these new faculty positions open up and they interview people so you have to take them out for lunch, dinner, pick them up drop them off, so that is se rvice. Dr. Peja thought that it was too early for him to form an opinion about service since up until now he has been kept out of it. He quipped, I have spent so little time at the UF that it will be difficult for me to offer any judgment on how good or bad service has that been so far.
82 Factors Influencing Time Spent on Service Dr. Brazil described his service responsibilities as holding clinics and short courses for dairy animals and farmers. Because he devotes 45% of his time to service, he goes . out at least 2 days a week to provide service to the clients. So usually Mondays and Tuesdays I am out and do this clinical work, look at sick animals . ." and treat them. In addition the short presentations that he prepares for farmers emanates from the research work that he was does. He mentioned service would start, very early in the morning, some days we leave at 5 some days 6. It would depend on what you have to do but usually early. Dr Hayek fulfills his commitment to service by reviewing the students applications who apply for the universitys Masters and PhD program, and by working with the search committee. He also mentioned another kind of service reviewing papers for peer reviewed journal papers and attending conferences, He concluded that There is one thing here and there that you do for service in your department. Dr. Illa mentioned that she was in the search committee for new hires. She was also asked to work with the admission committee. Since she is not formally on that committe e, and thinks that it is unfair since her effort and time, does not even get recognize and goes unmentioned in her annual evaluations. She feels that the time spent with the admissions committee is a lot more time consuming than the search committee becau se weve got more applications for grad[uate ] school than for the job . . She talked about this with someone in another department and was told to somehow put it down to reflect in her activities report. Dr. Peja and Dr. Roy stated that it was early time for them in the tenure appointment and as such they are not required to provide much service to the department. Dr. Peja mentioned that,
83 You are expected to provide some service to the department but for the first one or two years they try to give [ you] less of it so that you can just focus on your teaching and research, . once your years here increase then people get more and more involved, you know, with service . . Research Question 1 D What are early career foreign national faculty perce ptions of unspoken expectations? Unspoken or Unclear Expectations For Dr. Brazil the expectations are not very well defined. He expounded, It is all almost unspoken . .. It is all unspoken expectations and that works at little bit in the universitys advantage because always when you dont know what is expected of you most people will do extra, will do more, . . They all do the same; they work all the time because you dont know what the expectations are, and who is going to evaluate you . .Pro bably it wouldnt be very difficult to have more set guidelines or you know to evaluate the faculty but almost everywhere it is like this . . When it was mentioned that there were those percentages assigned by the department and that they pretty much determine what faculty should be focusing on, he remarked, Unspoken, all unspoken, you have your percentages, but of clinical work, but what is 45% what do you have to do, how do you count that, is it the number of cases that you see, is it the number of hours that you spend, . is it your income, all question marks. So all you do is, the best you can, and you hope for the best. But more or less you know if you are doing well or not. Dr. Choi mentioned that she knew what was expected of her and she did not think any of it was unspoken, however she hinted the same as Dr. Brazil. She said, Yeah, but how can you judge, I mean if I ask for one more class to teach, it is still going to be same 4060% officially." She pointed out that an official percentage doesnt mean exactly devoting 40 or 60% time for teaching or research. She described expectations that were not in writing such as obtaining an RO 1 grant, which she is required to pursue.. Dr. Hayek had no issues regarding the expectations. He stated, I will say they are really clear, we have documents . it is a written document which says that. it is not [going to] work too much this first year but definitely
84 2nd or 3rd year yeah thats [going to] apply. Actually everything is written, so nothing hidden, yeah. When asked if he had any issues with the expectations in the three areas of research, teaching, and service, Yeah I am okay and after a few weeks I feel good here, it is okay. Dr. Illa was not totally satisfied with the expectations and ho w they were evaluated, she mentioned, for teaching they tell you but you have to keep good evaluations, nobody says how good but it is expected that it is higher than the college average and maybe the department mean. She then talked about some of the ex pectations that she felt were unexpected, the expectations, see they expect a book, but this is an unspoken expectation I think. She further went on to say that although research is expected to be pursued by faculty, yet. Nobody tells you, . there ar e some journals that are better than others, and those would count more, but they dont give you how many. People are like so if you get two top journal publications, is that enough or if they are not top journals how many of, you know, average journal publications do you need to count, but nobody gives you a clear number. Dr. Peja sounded fairly satisfied with the expectations saying, As far as the unspoken expectations, one of the things that I am very happy about, they have stated very clearly about th e expectations and they also tell you a bunch of other tricks and also in such a way that I feel theres no unspoken expectation, at least so far. When asked if that was true for teaching, research, and service, he said, right, whatever . Yeah I know very clearly what am I expected to do. When asked if the expectations were in writing, he explained, as a matter of fact, yes, but also there have been some verbal communications so the guiding principles of the department are written in a big manual st ating who we are, what we want, and what are we expecting from each other and the characteristics of the biology department in the university..
85 Dr. Roy joked when asked about any unspoken expectations by saying, Not really, I mean I dont understand them if they are expecting something. She talked at length about how she was taking a lot of short listed search committee candidates for lunches and dinners, I f you are in an academic department you see these things coming . you have to do them and I didnt mind doing them it is just that I mind doing them so many times . but it is ok, it is like in the beginning you dont want to say . too much. She thought it was annoying because there were so many people that she had to do this for in one semester and she got worried that it will be a never ending stream, but it got better after that. Other than this unexpected unspoken exercise, she said, I just dont think that there was anything that was not clear . . I guess they could have been clearer about the research expectation but you know thats ok. Later she stated that even that aspect has become less ambiguous overtime in her job, and declared, it seems that if you have 10 articles then you have tenure. Stated Policies & Personal Ex periences Dr. Brazil seemed to be the most candid and frank in his views regarding stated policies. When asked to share about the difference between stated policies around tenure and his experiences, he expressed that, T heres no stated policy so you are in this business and you have to work, you find your way. You dont find your way; we have to fire you to get somebody else who can find their way. Thats the policy and I am fine with that. He stressed that the individual's personality, their people skill s and networking played a great part in the kind of experience that one will have. He went on to say, A person could have very different experience from mine and . it could be more difficult. The better you know your network before you start on tenure the better it is. The more people you know, more people you can collaborate with, the easier it is [going to] be. And in my place, if they had hired somebody else who did not
86 know the same people that I knew, then the same environment would have been a lo t harder for that person. When asked if he would have wanted to have anything differently, he mentioned that things were okay, No, yeah I am quite comfortable. There are challenges of course but normal challenges, day to day things . . The head of the department is very supportive, the other faculty members are very supportive, we have a good group, very good group, cant complain at all. Dr. Choi stated that she was too recently hired to be aware of any differences in theory and practice yet. She did say that faculty, before doing anything, should weigh everything in terms of it is importance towards tenure and promotion so that there are no surprises towards the final evaluation stage. She mentioned that, one of my committee just got tenure and he s ent me the package he submitted so that I can use it as a sort of template, so that was good. I dont think I am mistreated because I am a foreigner at least in the department. Dr. Hayek also could not put a finger on any differences between stated polic ies and experiences since he is also very new in the tenure track experience. His response was, Yeah I think it is pretty good. I think it is alright. He, however, revealed that two faculty members in his department who reached the tenure stage were not approved. He thought that both of them looked extremely polished and promising. Although he obviously did not know the reasons why they were not accepted, he believed that one was denied tenure because he was pure and not an applied economist and the othe r published fewer papers than expected although they were in really top journals. He wondered if, there was kind of a misunderstanding between the expectations of the school the college and an interpretation about what they should have been doing here . but it was a kind of a shock for everyone here.
87 Dr. Illa did not seem too excited about the comparison at this stage, she said, I have the information I guess which is too boring for me at this point but it is just how the tenure process works and all that. So I really need to read those bylaws. She also was not totally satisfied with her pace in terms of the tenure process for now as she said, I am not sure they evaluate you taking into account all the teaching you do and for research, it is alw ays scary because I dont think I have enough time to devote to research. Dr. Roy was also unsure about the stated policies. She mentioned that if you think about it they cant really have a stated policy, because if you dont get tenure you can sue the m. She thought that the policy was deliberately a little murky. However, she seemed quite certain that having articles by the tenure timeline would make a strong case. She added the disclaimer by saying, after that I dont know, you might do something wrong, still not get tenure, but from your side you are safe then. Faculty Evaluations The faculty members were asked about faculty evaluation meetings. Dr. Brazil mentioned, You are evaluated, you have an annual evaluation that you sit down with the head of the department, and then you have a tri annual evaluation and you better be doing good by then, otherwise you dont have much time left He expressed that, not all departments or universities have the annual meetings. Some places just have the tri an nual meetings, which make it very difficult to catch up. He thought the annual meetings were helpful. Responding to the question if he knew who would be part of the tri annual evaluation he said, They put a committee together and it is subjective . unl ess the university really decides to take the human factor out and say thats what the person has to do, it is impossible.
88 He mentioned that the mentor would not be part of that meeting, as he would be biased, but he could write helpful recommendation let ters. Since Dr. Choi and Dr. Hayek were only in their positions for about six months or so, they did not know much about the annual evaluation and what it entailed. According to Dr. Hayek, See Ill have my first evaluation probably and actually I know tha t yesterday the chair of the department was actually meeting different faculty members here. I think he does that once a year . performance review . . So actually we talked yesterday but I am still like 6 months only 5 months so we just talk about classes, what I am [going to] do in Fall . . Dr. Illa, declared that, When they do your assignment report, they count your percentage based on how many students you have in how many classes and other things like being on a committee for a PhD, and t hey basically calculate all that and the committees you are in and the rest is the time you are supposed to be doing research. She explained that this process was not fair since there are many other things that go unaccounted. Right now she is being made t o work with the admission committee, though she is not formally on that committee. Her effort and time, which is a lot, does not even get recognized and goes unmentioned in her annual evaluations. She further expressed, They basically calculate the committ ees that you are in. And like I am working with the admission committee and since I am not [officially] on the committee itself my work doesnt count. There are committees that take longer, there are classes that take longer, but they count [the] same. All the extra work you do doesnt go anywhere. The number of students you have on classes, that doesnt seem to matter. My teaching is supposed to be 55% of the time and during the semester I think it is . more. So it doesnt reflect that. I guess thats what they are trying to tell me, but if I dont overdo it, I get bad evaluations. Dr. Peja had his evaluation close to the second interview. He mentioned that the meeting went well and nothing unexpected was discussed. He said that he had met with the cha ir a couple of times since being hired and received her advice on a few things.
89 Summary In this chapter, the themes relating to the research questions posed in the first chapter of this study were presented. The themes described for research question 1 ( How do early career foreign national faculty perceive the socialization processes in Research I Universities?) were: choosing the professoriate,selecting this Research I University socialization processes in the university, college, and department and fac ulty socialization perceptions. T he themes described for research question 1 A (What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of teaching?) were: information and communication on teaching, factors influencing time spent on te aching The themes described for research question 1 B (What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of research?) were: information and communication on research and factors influencing time spent on research. The themes described for research question 1 C (What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of service?) included: information and communication on service and factors influencing time spent on service. The themes described for research question 1D (What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of unspoken expectations?) included: unspoken or unclear expectations, stated policies and personal experiences, and faculty evaluations.
90 Table 4 1. Interview one findings The mes Tree Nodes / References Sources 6 References 1343 Brazil 27/165 Choi 32/211 Hayek 26/257 Illa 30/205 Peja 26/194 Roy 31/311 Socialization as faculty: Choosing academia 6 19 2 5 4 2 2 4 Intera ction as faculty 5 30 3 10 1 7 9 Mentoring relationship 6 38 10 5 3 5 4 11 Opting for a research university 6 39 4 6 7 6 5 11 Spouse Family adjustment 5 118 21 21 38 29 9 Transition 6 52 3 16 1 21 3 8 o Research 4 19 4 1 10 4 Info and comm. on research 6 56 9 6 4 22 7 8 Research support 5 8 1 1 1 3 2 o Service 5 25 4 1 11 1 8 Info and comm. on service 6 47 16 2 4 8 2 15 o Teaching experience 6 99 3 4 25 16 12 39 Info and comm. on teaching 6 46 7 4 9 10 5 11 Language concerns 6 21 3 4 5 6 1 2 Teaching support 4 29 1 3 5 20 Socialization as student Acculturation as student 4 27 6 14 1 6 Adviser support as student 3 21 16 4 1 Language concern as student 5 28 9 7 8 2 2 Research as student 3 9 5 3 1 Teachin g experience as student 4 21 1 2 17 1 Coping mechanism as student 5 19 3 8 2 5 1 Coping mechanism as faculty 6 62 8 12 6 6 18 12 Coping mechanism as spouse 3 30 4 13 13 Balance: work personal family 6 52 10 12 5 6 17 2
91 Table 4 1. C ontinued Themes Tree Nodes / References Sources 6 References 1343 Brazil 27/165 Choi 32/211 Hayek 26/257 Illa 30/205 Peja 26/194 Roy 31/311 Cultural differences as faculty 4 23 1 11 3 8 Cultural diffe rences as family 3 18 5 2 13 Cultural difference as student 4 62 10 21 14 17 o Challenges faced in U.S. 4 49 1 29 8 11 Factors favoring acculturation in U.S. 5 74 15 7 23 17 12 Gender equity as student and faculty 4 16 2 5 1 8 Social ization processes Socialization as student 6 52 11 2 8 5 6 20 Socialization as faculty 6 60 4 11 3 6 8 28 o Department 6 37 4 8 2 4 6 13 o College 3 3 1 1 1 o University 3 3 1 1 1 o General 4 29 4 2 2 21
92 Table 4 2. Interview two findings Themes Tree Nodes / References Sources 6 References 537 Brazil 20/99 Choi 21/83 Hayek 15797 Illa 18/108 Peja 12/37 Roy 17/113 Time management 3 13 7 1 5 Teaching 6 59 6 8 17 11 4 1 3 Research 6 37 2 3 5 14 4 9 Service 6 26 2 2 4 10 2 6 Department socialization 6 93 18 12 18 12 4 29 College socialization 5 15 1 6 1 4 3 University socialization 5 20 1 8 1 2 8 Unclear/unspoken expectations 6 45 12 4 5 8 6 10 Institutional pol icies and faculty experiences 6 24 4 3 8 4 2 3 Information and communication: related to service 5 24 5 3 4 7 5 related to research 5 29 5 5 5 10 4 related to teaching 5 27 6 6 7 5 3 Annual evaluation Midterm Tenure 5 21 8 1 1 8 3 Prior Interview Probes As student o Academic adjustment as student 3 11 2 3 6 o Adviser support as student 4 11 3 2 1 5 o Language concern as student 3 8 4 2 2 Spouse family adjustment 5 18 5 2 8 2 1 Teaching support 5 13 1 5 3 3 1 Socialization as faculty 3 7 2 1 4 Research support 4 10 2 3 3 2 Connection with bigger family back home Mentoring relationship as faculty Individuals personality 3 3 3 6 11 9 7 2 2 1 2 4 2 3 3 94
93 Table 4 3. Research participant profile (As of Jan/Feb, 2011) # M/F Pseudonym for study Native country Time spent in U .S Time spent as tenureaccruing faculty 1 M Dr. Brazil Brazil 9.5 years 2 months on H1visa (on F1 visa since October 2010) 2 F Dr. C hoi South Korea 10 years 2 months 3 M Dr. Hayek Colombia 11 years 3 months 4 F Dr. Illa Spain 7.5 years 1.5 years 5 M Dr. Peja Guatemala 7 years 6 months 6 F Dr. Roy India 9.5 years 1.5 years
94 Table 4 4. Survey questions and responses Pseudonym Are you able to perform your responsibilities well as they relate to teaching Are you able to perform your responsibilities well as they relate to research? Are you able to perform your responsibilities well as they relate to service? What percentage (100%) of your time do you spend on: What classes do you teach? How long are your classes? What is the frequency of your classes? How much time do you need to prepare for each class? Dr. Hayek Strongly agree Neutral No research for now. Too much emphasis on teaching for now Disagree Not much time for it Teaching 98% Research 0% Service 2% Only 3 months no research and little service for now Intl. humanitarian assistance and development policy 50 minutes and 95 minutes Five 50 minute classes and two 95 minute classes 5 hours for one and 4 hours for the second Dr. Choi Agree Strongly agree Agree Although no service for now Teaching 40% Research 60% No service yet in first year Lipid & carbohydrate metabolism 3 hours Twice a week 10 hours per class Dr. Illa Ag ree Agree Neutral Teaching 70% Research 25% Service 5% Spanish 50 minutes 3 periods a week 3 4 hours for each class hour of a new course Dr. Peja Strongly agree Strongly agree Neutral I have not performed any service yet Teaching 50% Research 50% No se rvice is required for first year Stats for biological sciences 50 minutes each. Two periods per session Twice a week A lot Dr. Brazil Strongly agree Strongly agree Strongly agree Teaching 5% Research 25% Extension 25% Service 45% Grad classes in Vet sc ience One hour each Once a week 2 hours each Dr. Roy Strongly agree Agree Strongly agree Teaching 55% Research 40% Service 5% Undergrad economics 50 minutes and 100 minutes 4 days a week 3 4 hours for new subjects 1 2 for old subjects
95 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION The purpose of the study was to explore the perceptions and experiences of the socialization processes among early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty in a Research I University The open, frank exchanges that these faculty member s shared with the researcher, as another foreign national, unearthed certain admissions and findings which may not have come out otherwise. This chapter will discuss some of the prominent findings of the study and make connections with the literature revi ew. Th e chapter begins with an overview of the significant themes in light of the research questions, and subquestions, implications theory and practice, recommendations for future research, and concluding thoughts. Research Question 1: How do early caree r foreign national faculty perceive the socialization processes in Research I universities? Enculturation into the U .S and the Academy As a foreign national, the researcher can relate closely with those who come for their graduate studies in the U .S .. When international students come here as students, they generally take a while to get used to the customs, traditions, culture, and study habits that the U .S environment has to offer. According to Terano (2007) international students do so to satisfy thei r social and cultural needs and to strengthen supportive environment, retention, and success. As Pederson (1991) puts it, these rules have been learned over a lifetime by locals. International students provide an example of a population that must learn a wide range of culturally defined and typically unfamiliar roles in a short time under conditions of considerable stress (p. 12). Many, especially from collectivist cultures, find it difficult to come to terms with these sudden changes, since they virtuall y know no one here, have no family connections and cannot call on friends or relatives for help (Lee & Rice, 2007; Pederson, 1991; Sumer et al., 2008). Whether they come as singles, couples, or families, there are multifaceted challenges that they face. As
96 Nieto (2004) puts it, culture is integral to the learning process, but it may affect each individual differently (p. 148). The more the cultural contrast of the students home country to that of the U .S environment, the more complex, anxious, and time consuming the adjustment process for individuals turn out to be (Fritz et al., 2004; Pederson, 1991; Sumer et al, 2008). One of the participants mentioned that those who come to the U .S for studies are not ordinary individuals but select top students of t heir countries There may be some truth in that although critics according to Pederson (1991) refute this claim saying that international students get selected for higher studies abroad more on the basis of family connections rather than better qualificati ons. All the participants of this study came to the U .S as graduate students and have done well to secure faculty positions in a Research I University Having braved the challenges at the student level they now feel better placed in a more familiar enviro nment, and have the support or comfort of knowing so many international or local friends and connections here. Pederson relates this as a U shaped curve (p. 16) whereby the students come full of excitement, experience cultural shock, develop feelings of despair and dejection, and then recover and get acculturated overtime. He also mentioned the W curve (p. 17) whereby the same individuals meet a reverse culture shock returning to their home countries and then do not experience the same trauma on re entr y to the U .S as professors which they felt as students. Most of the participants in this study wanted to join academia as tenure track faculty members. One of them in fact received an offer for a nontenure assistant professor position but opted out of i t to take a tenure accruing job. Similarly most of the participants showed their keenness for research and wanted to be part of a large R esearch I U niversity. One participant took the position in her current research extensive university despite knowing that this institution had a reputation for its poor salary structure as compared to other public and private universities.
97 For entry level positions, financial incentives are usually one of the key motivations, and to forego those considerations for the nature, type of job, or the institution demonstrates special interest, or that other factors were more important. In this case the individual opted for a university which provided her greater research opportunities in her area of interest i.e. language studies Literature provides abundant evidence that the tenure period for new faculty members is fraught with stress and difficulties. Many of these writers also engage in a fair deal of dialogue about the expectations early career faculty members face for provi ding quality performance in all three functions of teaching, research, and service irrespective whether they are in predominantly teaching or research institutions (Greene et al., 2008; Higgins & Welsh, 2009; McCormick & Barnes, 2008). Not much however is known about the perceptions and experiences of early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty (Foote et al., 2008; Mamiseishvili, 2007). The interviews with the research participants did not reveal any serious concerns as mentioned above. For all o f them, it was a deliberate choice to work in academia and while most participants talked about their passion for research, some also expressed their liking for teaching. It is therefore an important finding to know how early career foreign national facult y, who choose the profession deliberately, and are passionate about academia, relate to the enculturation process. Race, Gender and Language None of the study participants reported that race or gender played any factor either when they first came to the U S and joined universities as students, or now that they have started working in a Research I University Dr. Illa thought that students seemed more respectful to male professors. She felt students were taking more liberties with her and asking frank questions. Later she added that she had a good rapport with students and it was all in good fun and humor. Perhaps this may have more to do with the professors personality and approachability, than
98 something identifying with gender. Dr. Choi mentioned that gender equality was one issue that had attracted her to stay in the U .S She also did not think that there was any reason for her to feel mistreated because she was a foreign national faculty. Dr. Roy had similar feelings and felt good going on walks or buying groceries alone which she said was not easy back home. These views held by three foreign born early career tenure accruing females from three different countries may not appear very pronounced but in the absence of literature in this area stand out as a finding. The researcher would tend to agree with their opinions on gender. Both participants from Asia belonged to the male dominated environment where females have an unequal status. Female s coming from those areas experience a great deal of freedom and a feeling of equality as they move to the U .S. T he researcher s wife and two daughters have held similar views and do not want to go back to their country solely for that reason. Race however does play a big part in the adjustment, and the transition becomes harder with age. The researcher could see this happening as his kids took very little time to develop very strong relationships in their school s and neighborhood, while he and his wife needed a lot of time to form only a few. All the participants of this study felt quite acculturated in the U .S environment. They now were now making friends with local Americans. H owever all of the m mentioned forming larger alliances with people from their country who were in the U .S T hey were going to their count ry every year, or every other year, depending on their ticket fares and maintaining daily interaction s with their bigger families via phone or Skype None of them talked about any insecurity or safety issues on the basis of their race, which they greatly appreciated as a special feature of the U .S.
99 Language, culture, and identity are said to go hand in hand (Blomquist (2009), and it seems that in a monolingual country like U .S ., a reasonable command over the English language is very important (Pederson, 1991, Sumer et al., 2008). While talking about language concerns, Dr. Roy mentioned that being from India she did not have any problems socializing in the U .S ., however she said that people from some of the other Asian countries like China, Korea for exam ple, had real issues dealing with this barrier, and to counter this tended to huddle together with people of their own countries. Dr. Choi from Korea, appeared to fall in that category, and seemed a little aloof and isolated. Referring to college level mee tings she mentioned feeling awkward. She shared that she felt more comfortable in research based conferences or something similar, but did not like attending social events. All of the other faculty members, despite very strong accents, appeared confident a bout their English speaking skills Considering that English was the participants second language and the fact that they had strong accents the researcher could see them having lan guage issues in classes. Apart from Dr Brazil, who seemed to have a good command over the English language, all others would have struggled in classes and outside. Dr. Roy appeared quite fluent but did not have a very clear accent. The case of Dr. Illa was different since she was teaching Spanish. The other three participants had spent only a few months each in the professoriate and perhaps did not have many students confronting them over the ir language issues yet It was either that, or the fact that they are so young in the profession that they lack ed the confidence to share and admit it with the researcher It can, however, be said that while language is a very important factor for foreign faculty, the participants of this study did not reveal that as a concern.
100 Family Concerns Indirectly related to their socialization proc esses were family concerns. Literature reveals that spouses / legal dependents of international students, especially those having F2 visa status, are prohibited from engaging in educational and professional endeavors during their sojourn and experience s ocial isolation, economic challenges, and emotional struggles (Teshome & Osei Kofi, 2011, p. 1). The international students who go on to join professoriate continue to have similar anxieties, in addition to those connected with their work activities. Sole m and Foote (2006) highlight early career faculty apprehensions regarding productivity and attitudes including inefficient time management, lack of collegiality, and difficulty balancing work and family life (p. 202). Just as literature points out, two of the faculty members of this study also reported serious family concerns. Both their spouses were having adjustment problems, which had a lot to do with language and cultural issues as well as relating to the tenure track or socialization processes of t he participants. Dr. Choi had a difficult family life in the U .S since her husband, belonging to a male dominated society, became domesticated after moving here. Ten years is a long time to carry that bone of contention. She is hoping to get an H1 visa now that she is a full time employee, which will allow her husband to either take up catering business or open a Korean restaurant of his own. She is expecting that this will improve their relationship, which up until now seemed like a daily struggle. Dr. Hayek on the other hand got married shortly before getting this faculty position and expressed that his spouse was not getting along well with the U .S culture, language, and ways of life. He indicated that she did not want to live here and knowing that he would not leave the U .S or his job, did not want to continue the relationship. Dr. Hayek claims that he tried what he could but expects that they will be divorced before the Summer semester is over. He mentioned that his
101 tenure duties might also have contributed as a factor since he could not give much time in her adjustment. He shared that his chair once invited him over to his house for dinner mostly to talk to him about his home situation. This indicates that the he took the chair into confidence, and although he did not report to that effect, his home or personal life was actually affecting work and office life. Both Dr. Choi and Dr. Hayek are from extremely collectivist cultures. Based on Springs (2008) listing Korea is the fifth most collectivist c ountry and Columbia the second. The researcher is from the fourth most collectivist culture himself and hence can imagine the issues the spouses would have had to face after moving to the U .S. Dr. Chois husband belonging to a male dominated environment an d ran a restaurant in Korea, has been relegated to a dependent status for the last ten years. A person who was running the house and having a lot of prestige may have lost a significant amount of respect even from his own family and that is very hard to accept. Dr. Hayeks spouse who had a degree in psychology, would have felt lonely coming to t he U .S ., having no immediate friends and connections, and a husband completely dedicated to the professoriate. One would have thought that Dr. Hayek who shared simi lar issues while doing his masters from a total black institution, might have done better to make the transition easier for his spouse. He, however, was of the opinion that he coped with his transition himself and expected that his wife also needed to give herself time to manage on her own ; something he shared he learnt from the American way of life. Perhaps he has acculturated too well in to the U .S culture. Dr. Brazil and Dr. Peja both were married when they moved to the U .S as students. Both of them r eported that despite the number of years they had lived in the U S ., their wives could not speak English and were now attending English classes. Both wives spent a lot of time at home as housewives raising their children although they had a lot of friends from their home
102 c ommunity. One was a physiotherapist and the other an architect before they married. The participants informed that their spouses neither pursue d studies nor work in their fields after coming to the U .S. It however appears strange that de spite being reasonably educated they did not even learn the English language up till now, and accepted a domesticated life Dr. Roy and Dr. Illa did not have those family issues to report. Dr. Roys husband had just finished his PhD in another state and was in the process of applying for positions in different U .S universities. She mentioned feeling lonely at times, but thinks they will continue to have a long distance relationship. Dr. Illa, the only faculty member to be still single, relies on the gym to get some relief from her work commitments. The family characteristics suggest a self centered approach among the married participants. They did no t seem to be perturbed by the fact that their spouses were not having a good time in the U .S. Although they may be bothered by these family concerns, however, none of them reported work or any job related responsibilities affected as a consequence. None of the married faculty members mentioned any adjustment issues among their children. The children were eith er very young when they came to the U .S or were born here and perhaps adapted rather quickly into the U .S culture. Institutional S ocialization As far as the university or college socialization goes, none of the participants had many favorable comments The socialization opportunities were either very limited or illtailored to the specific needs of the foreign national faculty. However, they mentioned receiving reasonable socialization effort from their departments and support on performance related are as from others in the department including the chair, mentors, senior faculty, and peers. While the other participants appeared satisfied Dr. Choi criticized the departmental efforts towards faculty settlement and socialization. She reflected that the first month and a half she spent in the
103 university may have been productive had the department been following a proper structured program to welcome and settle new faculty. She expounded that owing to the diversity and expectations that foreign faculty have, s ome, especially from collectivist cultures, may need more attention and support than others. Hence, a closer rapport needs to be made to know where, what, and how help is sought. Two participants mentioned that departments noted caution on making extende d socialization, suggesting that departments develop their own programs to meet those needs. Departmental Support Most of the participants reported receiving teaching and research support from seniors or other faculty members in the department. Teaching support included gaining access to previous course faculty teaching materials and syllabi, guidance on teaching, peer reviews and observations. Research support included collaborations with senior faculty or research ideas conceived during discussions wit h them. Service guidance, although not really required by some, came from observing senior faculty perform in departmental committees and student advisement. Referring to the departmental input of their present university to Green et al. (2008) findings on institutional support, one can see some useful peer/colleagues assistance that the participants reported both for teaching and research. In addition, although most of them did not have assigned mentors yet, subject to their brief stay in the university, they did expect to have one, or more in the form of a mentoring committee, to provide guidance in future. While one participant was refused direction by one senior faculty in her grant writing initiative, this was only an exception and not the norm.
104 Resea rch Q uestion 1 A ) What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of teaching in Research I Universities? All the participants appeared confident about their ability to teach. When asked this question through the brief survey instrument, four chose strongly agree and two chose agree (Table 4 4). According to Green et al. (2008) Research I University workload is generally allocated at 40% teaching. However in case of the participants only one person mentioned that allocation. Two of the others showed high percentages of 98% and 70% while the other two mentioned 55% and 50%. The only other participant had a small teaching component and taught just 5% of the time. Most of the participants mentioned having to spend the majority of their time on teaching. Some indicated that it was at times more than the percentages that they had indicated. The average time spent on teaching came to 53% close to the 55.11% mark as studied by Davis et al. (2006). However, it can be argued that the average would have been significantly higher than what the literature shows had the one participant in this study not been hired on such a small teaching component. Owing to the small sample size, the percentages are easily affected by extreme values. Most of the faculty members felt that the expectations of teaching were very clear and communicated well in advance to provide adequate preparatory time to make course folder, power point slides, and class activities. Most faculty members also mentioned receiv ing good support from other faculty members towards course material preparation, and on receiving teaching advice or feedback through peer observations. The faculty reported having a fair deal of freedom in terms of how they teach in class, and even if the re was a previous teaching format, they were not forced to follow that. Considering the little time most faculty members had spent in academia they were mostly teaching new courses. Most of them therefore mentioned that they needed excessive preparation ti me (Lang, 2008; Toews & Yazedjian, 2007) of three to four hours
105 or more for every hour of teaching time for new courses. However, they held expectations that they would be teaching at least some of the courses that they had already taught which for them me ant reduced prep time requirement. Two of them hinted that class size was one factor related towards time allocation as a hundred plus class size meant developing varied class activities and requiring longer grading time. Two of them mentioned that prepar ation time differed on the basis of difficulty level of the class topics also. Some expected to be teaching graduate classes soon, which meant smaller class sizes and reduced preparation time. Research Q uestion 1 B ) What are early career foreign national f aculty perceptions of the expectation of research in Research I Universities? The participants survey responses also revealed their satisfaction about their research responsibilities (Table 44), and indicated an allocation between 25% to 60% an average of 37.5%. This average is very close to the general allocation of 40% for Research I Universities (Green et al., 2008). One of the participants was hardly involved in any research. Just like teaching the averages here also were affected by one poor resp onse and would have been much higher otherwise. However, the average was still significantly higher than 26.26%, which the literature on tenure accruing faculty suggests (Davis et al., 2006). Similar to the literature (Greene et al., 2008), most of the faculty members expressed that subject to their employment in a Research I University they knew that research was valued more and they had to do well both in terms of time spent and publications. Knowing the pressure, however, their time allocation for now does not permit this in the wake of excessive time they are devoting to teaching. Most of them expected the time spent on research to go up as their length of time increased in the institution. Some mentioned that they needed more information on the num ber of articles they were expected to publish per year or during their tenure track period, as well as the names of the
106 preferred journals to pursue for publications. For some both the numbers of publications and type of journals appeared important while others felt that merely the numbers were sufficient to achieve tenure. Some were also confused on how the time percentages for both research and teaching were determined and evaluated, since an additional class or more/less work on research did not have any effect on them. One participant mentioned that she was refused feedback on a grant paper by her mentor and felt that people in the other departments were more approachable. Another felt that once the research focus was determined, one could do any resear ch within that orbit, without any institutional interference. For Dr. Choi however, there was the pressure to secure the NIH RO 1 grant, but then she had already agreed to pursue that in the selection interview. Half the participants thought that the Summe r semester provided a better opportunity of catching up with research as they deliberately kept little or no teaching assignments during those months. Only one participant as per the recommendation of Santo et al. (2009) reported setting aside uninterrupte d time and was utilizing one and a half day per week for research. Research Qu estion 1 C ) What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of the expectation of service in Research I Universities? Two of the participants in this study did not ha ve any service requirement, while t hree just had 5% 5%, and 2% service assigned Only one had a large percentage of 45%, however, service for him also included clinical work and short workshops for the dairy companies and their employees. The other two pa rticipants were providing service by working on the admission and search committees in their respective departments. Despite the high involvement of one participant in service the average came to 9.50%, which is much lower than the general percentage of 1 8.23% (Davis et al., 2006) or for the allocation relating to Research I University faculty of 20% (Green et al., 2008). The lower service involvement may be due to the fact that four of the participants had been in the ir appointments for less than six mont hs while the other
107 two had spent a year and a half in academia. Most of the participants expected that their service component would go up with time. The fact that the work expectations for the participants varied from what the literature revealed may be due to the discipline of the faculty member and that they are new to the profession. Often, in the first two years of their initial contract, faculty are expected to spend more time on research and teaching, while their service roles are diminished (Behar Horenstein, Zafar, & Roberts, in press; Lang, 2008, Terpstra & Honoree, 2009). Most of the participants expected that research and service would increase overtime, while teaching would maintain its current momentum. None of the participants felt that the allocations were unreasonable. This can either be due to the fact that they are comfortable with their roles and as such do not have many issues/complaints, or they are being allowed an opportunity by their departments to get settled in their new professio ns, without overwhelming them right at the very onset. All faculty members in concert with the literature reported spending more than the assigned 40 hours per week working towards their job responsibilities (Link et al., 2008). Most were regularly taking work home and working on t he weekends. Dr. Brazil was the only exception. He reported that he gets up every morning at 6:00am if not sooner, works hard during the day, and leaves the office for home at 5pm sharp. If there was unfinished work, he would cat ch up with that the next day. If it was urgent he would work either late at night or early morning without taking time away from family. This therefore is another finding that work can be done, there are ways of making the tenure accruing stage more organi zed and practical; and some can do it better than the others (OLeary, 2009).
108 Research Q uestion 1 D ) What are early career foreign national faculty perceptions of unspoken expectations in Research I Universities? The participants had mixed views to offer about unspoken expectations. Some found the expectations to be confusing and conflicting (Hamilton, 2005; Hill, 2004; Sorcinelli, 1994). Dr. Brazil reported that the expectations were all unspoken and deliberately kept vague so that the faculty members cou ld try to outdo each other and go over and beyond what was required There was one participant who mentioned the requirement for publication of a book that to her was an unspoken expectation. Similarly another participant indicated the requirement of obtai ning an RO1 award which was not given anywhere in writing. Some thought that the expectations were pretty well laid out and given to them in writing. Study participants seemed quite clear about teaching. They were assigned classes well ahead of the resp ective semesters allowing them sufficient time to prepare their syllabi and teaching materials Assistance was also provided in making those folders, as well as extending feedback through class observations, rendering guidance where necessary. Research was however an area where there was significant confusion. Faculty did not have clear numbers in terms of the articles to be published per year. Often they were unclear about which journals to pursue or which journal was more preferred One confided about her unfamiliarity with grant processing and appeared in need of help. Some found the percentages to be confusing and contradicting since more classes or large or small class sizes would not have any influence on them. Participants felt that the percentage al location of time for both teaching and research w as confusing, contradicting, and not clearly quantifiable. They thought that doing more research work, increasing course offerings/class sizes or spending more time on teaching did not have any effect on per centages.
109 Faculty members did n ot think about or know much of stated policies. According to Dr. Brazil policies simply were not stated, and the expectations were all unspoken. He went on to say that personality types, people skills, and networking helped socialization and faculty connections. He pointed that that the differences among individual characteristics determined whether the environment would be challenging for a person or provide opportunities for growth. Dr. Hayek shared the shocking news that two faculty members from his department were denied tenure when other faculty felt they were ready for it This incident emphasized that there was always the possibility of a misunderstanding between expectations and faculty interpretations. None of the participants had any shocking discoveries to relate from faculty evaluations. Dr. Illa, however, did feel that she was doing more service than was accounted for in the evaluations. She also thought that her teaching percentage of 55% did not come close to r eflecting the amount of teaching she was actually doing during the semester. A comparison of findings for tenure accruing foreign and nonforeign nationals is presented in Table 5 1. The graphical representation of the grounded theory model of tenure accr uing foreign national faculty socialization processes is given in Figure 51. Implications for Theory The participants of this study mentioned that they did not have any language concerns, and that students did not have any difficulty understanding them. Despite one particpant mentioning that students came to her regarding comprehension issues, she felt certain that they were not serious about it. All the others had strong accents as well, and the researcher could see them struggling with the language, fl uency, and expression. Dr. Brazils speech was clearer than the others and yet he too had an accent which local students may find disconcerting. While the purpose of this study was not to focus on language proficiency and accents of the participants, it
110 ap peared that language may impact the quality of instruction foreign nationals provide in class (Pearson et al., 2006). Not many foreign nationals know they have an accent till they are told that they do. Some realize it but do not know that their speech is difficult to understand. Everyone has an accent and what appears the norm in one geographical location may not be so in another. This is further exacerbated across borders. Further research is required to explore how language and linguistic proficiency aff ects student comprehension. Language was also found to be a concern for most of the spouses of married participants. Language, unemployment, and depression seemed to play a factor in their marital relationships (Beiser & Hou, 2001). The three female parti cipants in this study talked about a feeling of self worth and equality after coming into the U .S (Spring, 2008). Two females from India and Korea found the change to be much more significant than the third participant from Italy. None of the male partici pants found gender to be a factor in the U .S. They voiced the perception that greater equality prevails in the U .S between the two genders than what they had experienced in their home cultures. They may have had new experiences like cooking or helping wit h house chores here, more so than they were used to in their own countries. However, since they had their spouses with them, who were mainly domesticated, it was not clear if that was so. A greater probing into this area may have revealed more information and may be the focus of another study. Race was another aspect which the participants did not emphasize. While Nieto (2004) talks about the existence of racial discrimination both in the educational as well as other societal institutions, none of the par ticipants felt race to have played any factor during their first entry into the U .S as students or their movement to a Research I University as faculty The researcher found race to be a topic in the U .S that people do not feel comfortable talking about. H is
111 experiences suggest that those coming from collectivist cultures seem totally lost i n an alien territory devoid of the close relationships and connections that they thrive on. Though one adapts to an environment with time, every time one makes a move to another place one expects the same treatment one would get in ones own country. One participant shared a similar experience of her first day in professoriate. This is another area which needs further exploration. The greatest contrast from literature found in this study was that despite participants were mostly fresh hires they did not seem too overwhelmed with the responsibilities of the professoriate (Greene et al., 2008; Hamilton, 2005; Hill, 2004; Sorcinelli, 1994). While they mentioned having to s pend a lot of time on teaching they did not reveal being beleaguered by it. This may either be owing to the support provided by other faculty members, which participants acknowledged for teaching, or to the resoluteness of the foreign nationals who feel re ady for any challenge after braving the entry level tests and tribulations when they first came to the U .S as students (Pederson, 1991). Another possibility can be that the early career foreign nationals do not want to share this with another for the fear of appearing incapable of shoulder ing their responsibilities. This remains another area where more research is required. Table 5 2 lists some of the key points of the theoretical framework discussed in Chapter 2, the findings of this study. and whether t he results confirmed or refuted the theoretical perspectives. Implications for P ractice The findings of this study suggest many ways how educational institutions can make things better for their new faculty members. Recommendations are suggested in terms of 1) institution al socialization, 2) department al support 3) foreign national faculty.
112 Institutional Socialization Some participants of this study made references to university, college, and departmental socialization effort. As per the participants re sponses, the university and colleges need to do more than just an isolated orientation or a one time reception. Organizational writers such as Bolman and Deal (2008) suggest that employees want to have a strong sense of belongingness with institutions. The ways they are taken into an organization remain part of their memories forever. It should, therefore be done in a befitting manner. Universities should provide faculty members with more opportunities to come together and feel proud of joining an organiza tion that cares for its employees. Colleges also need to do more, and should engage faculty of different departments with each other through collaboration scholastic pursuits, and recreational activities. Based on the study findings, a well organized departmental orientation seems to be something that all faculty members should go through. It should be elaborate and include all the important details that faculty may need to get started. While it should advise on the basics like dependents health insuranc e as a component package for foreign nationals, it should also dwell on H1 visa related issues, accommodation, and information on other faculty members/people from their home countries. Creating activities, and a spouse group for the faculty members signi ficant others may be another way that foreign national faculty can settle down faster in a new environment. Departmental Support Most faculty indicated that meeting the chair usually happened on yearly evaluations apart from the first meeting that they had at the time of joining the department. This practice may work well with those from the U .S ., subject to the individualistic and independent character of the people in this country; however, foreign nationals may want a closer linkage for direction,
113 guidance, and connectivity. T he department chair, mentor assigned, or senior faculty member s should create a close, regular dialogue with the faculty on issues of settlement into the new location, adjustment into the department, and understanding the departmental expectations. For many participants this was their first job experience in the U .S. Therefore it would be reasonable for them to expect information on things like the organizational code of conduct and other job related requirements. Some of the participants mentioned receiving information on the institutions sexual harassment policy, however, knowledge of other information relating to the organizational culture may be just as important. Most of the participants mentioned that they were treated equally as local faculty members. Equal at times is not equitable (Nieto, 2004) While it is good to know that there is no discrimination, foreign faculty, even those who acculturate well in this system, may need some closer guidance or counseling from senior fac ulty or department chair in order to be able to deal with departmental requirements better. There is growing talk about encouraging multiculturalism (Ivey et al., 2002; Molinsky, 2007; Nieto, 2004; Sleeter, 2001; Spring, 2008; Sue, 2001; Sue & Sue, 2004) a nd it will be appropriate that nonnationals may be recognized as having specific cultural requirements and be dealt with differently from the local faculty. More than 50% foreign students come from Asia (Pederson, 1991) i.e. countries which are far more c ollectivist than the U .S the most individualistic country in the world (Spring, 2006). These faculty members go past their initial cultural shock on entry into the U .S as students as they find others from their countries or from other collectivist nation s. They find a bit of a cultural shock again when they join an institution for work ( Pederson 1991). In the U .S environment foreign faculty members may not be fortunate to have others who are open enough to form close bonds As was found from this study, some foreign nationals while adjusting to their official work requirements start
114 developing family/spouse concerns. They may need guidance or counseling on creating a balance between work, self, and family time. The onus lies on the department chair, ment or, senior faculty or some other culturally competent helping professional who can provide good timely sensitive intervention strategies to early career foreign national faculty in nurturing relationships, both at home and in the organization. This can take the form of faculty retreats, home luncheons or dinners, potluck parties, picnics, or short trips to local attractions including family members. Since multiculturalism is encouraged in U .S educational institutions (Sleeter, 2001), it is expected that p roper departmental support to the foreign national faculty would mean providing them essential culturally competent guidance on adjustment issues, both as individuals and families for settling in the U .S The researcher tried to find if there were people i n education and leadership who specialized in multicultural education. Only one could be found, namely Dr. Christine Clark Professor of Curriculum and Instruction, Senior Scholar in Multicultural Education, and Founding Vice President for Diversity and Inc lusion at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. In part, her agenda focuses on white antiracist identity development and multicultural teacher education preparation and multicultural curriculum transformation in P 12 and higher education across disciplines She special izes in critical multicultural, bilingual education as a tool for disarming violence in schools and communities To provide guidance to foreign nationals who join academia, there will need to be more individuals who specialize in multicultural ism Although some faculty members stated that they were given expectations in writing, it was obvious that they did not have a clear understanding in terms of numbers for articles or research guidelines over preferred journal publications. Others denied r eceiving any stated policies or clear directions. It is surprising that in an institution where students are taught about
115 life issues, making priorities, managing time through assignment time logs, that faculty are not provided clear directions. More so when the guidance needed is on research, and the institution happens to be a Research I University Even if the idea is to keep people guessing and aiming for higher productivity, it may still be useful to at least give them the minimum cut off levels, and t he kind of journals that the department prefers or gives higher scores on publications. All the participants mentioned receiving quality support from their advisers while they studied in grad schools. This not only helped them deal with the move to a new c ulture better but also allowed them to come to terms with their study requirements. Many participants mentioned doing well in research work because of the support that they received from their advisers. It is the kind of support that the early career forei gn national faculty needs from their assigned mentors or mentoring committees and a good start can be the harbinger of a great career ahead. Foreign National F aculty The l iterature suggests that married faculty find it difficult to balance work and family responsibilities; either one flourishing, at the expense of the other (Bellas & Toutkoushian, 1999; Lang, 2005). The study revealed similar findings. Familywork balance was not evidenced for many of the participants. All faculty members were found to be doing well in their new institutions and meeting their tenure track requirements. They expressed dedication and commitment in meeting professional requirements. While they seemed focused with their job responsibilities and appeared confident of making it to the tenure stage, they did not seem to be looking after the needs of their spouses too well. Although there is very little literature available examining the marital relationships of foreign nationals who come to work or study (Chang, 2004), the findings from a survey by a large university in Texas (Yi et al., 2003) revealed relationship with romantic partner was listed as one of the top three concerns for international graduate students
116 (Bigler, 2007). All five married participants reported having relationship issues. Spouses of three participants know very little English and are housewives/husband. O ne participant is about to experience a divorce. The only other married participant is contemplating a long distance relationship with her spouse. It is clear that the family lives of the participants are in disarray. In an attempt to do well with their education and professional lives they have put home life on the back burner or at least have relegated the priorities of their spouses. Although some of the Asian and other developing nations have male dominated cultures, however, to have this situation in an equal opportunity culture of the U .S appears a little out of place, especially for academics such as the tenureaccruing faculty. Since the partici pants appear to have acculturated in the environment, it makes sense that they start shouldering more responsibilities in the home front, enabling their partners to experience study, work related opportunities or a better home environment While faculty members should be cognizant of their responsibilities, the institutions may also take steps to educate these faculty members in terms of time and priority management and on how to create a balance between work, home, and leisure. This will not only make these faculty members home lives better but will also ensure a greater productivity for the institution and the scholarly community at large, since satisfied workers are productive workers (Ropella, 2008) Recommendations for Future Study In view of the fac t that not many studies have been conducted on foreign national tenure accruing professors, it may be useful to conduct a more extensive study allowing patterns of consistency to emerge from other Research I U niversities. Similarly it may be useful to comp are or contrast findings of this study with studies conducted on the early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty of other educational institutions within the Carnegie Classification.
117 This study revealed an existence of family/spousal concerns fo r the early career foreign national faculty members. While there are some studies on the conditions of the spouses of international students who come to the U .S (Bigler, 2007), not much has been explored over the experiences of those spouses who continue to stay in the U .S after their partners prolong their sojourns by joining the professoriate. It will be interesting to see if their lives undergo any changes just as this study promised for one who was expecting to start a job or business once his wife secured the H1 visa. Gender did not emerge strongly in this study as far as the tenure accruing faculty was concerned. Another study could explore whether gender of faculty spouses display different growth patterns once the faculty members acquire tenure and stay beyond. Literature reveals that spouses of international students generally lead a frustrating time in the U .S (Teshome & Osei Kofi, 2011). It will therefore be useful to see if gender plays any significant part in their adjustment into the U .S a s they continue to live here over an extended period of time. Some of the participants described the differences they experienced from the individualist ic cultural expectations of U .S in contrast to the collectivist cultures that they come from A study c omprising an even number of participants belonging to the two culture types may highlight different or similar experiences that they develop overtime and can provide future implications for study. As the literature reveals mentoring can play a big part in making the new faculty aware of their responsibilities and prepare them better as they join the professoriate (Driggs et al., 2007; McCormick & Barnes, 2008). Most of the participants in this study had spent very little time in a Research I University and hence did not have much mentoring experiences to share. One faculty confided that she did not receive any feedback from her mentor on the grant proposal that
118 she had specifically presented to him for that purpose. Although mentoring should come in early, another study conducted in Research I Universities that focuses on mentoring and targets tenure accruing faculty who are into the profession for at least one year, may produce different findings. Conclusion As evident from this study, graduate students are attracted to the possibility of starting on the tenure track academic career in a large Research I University The findings from this study do give strength to the fact that early career foreign national faculty can shoulder their responsibilities well if proper nurturing, guidance and timely support is provided to them. While the departmental chairs and senior faculty members of this study provided that and made the process less daunting for the participants, a consistent, structured and well planned s ocialization process at university, college, and department levels can provide a welcoming impact, help ease the faculty in the new environment, and give them an accelerated start where they can focus on the task ahead. In order to enable the early ca reer foreign national tenure accruing faculty to discharge their duties confidently it will be helpful if institutions can provide clear verbal/written expectations in the three areas of teaching, research, and service for achieving tenure. While this will remove much of the confusion and save time spent on unnecessary activities, it will allow the faculty to concentrate their energies on institutional priorities thereby increasing their chances of earning tenure. While there will be inherent diversity co nsidering that the foreign national faculty will be coming from different countries and cultures, each university should employ the services of a culturally competent helping professional, comprising either a senior faculty or a hired specialist. This will not only provide necessary counseling to the incoming faculty on life/work balance, but will also guide the local staff towards better adaptations with international faculty. Short courses,
119 discussions, or awareness sessions on the commonalities or clashes existing between the collectivist and individual cultures may be a starting point on forging a buildup of a fruitful long term relationship of the early career foreign national faculty with their colleagues, and i nstitutions.
120 Figure 51. Zafars mo del of tenure accruing foreign national faculty socialization processes
121 Table 5 1. Comparison of findings for tenure accruing foreign and nonforeign nationals # Key Points Foreign nationals Non foreign nationals 1. Faculty members overwhelmed with hu ge expectations in the initial years of professoriate (Greene et al., 2008; Higgins & Welsh, 2009; McCormick & Barnes, 2008). No Yes 2. Early period fraught with stress and difficulties (Greene et al., 2008; Higgins & Welsh, 2009; McCormick & Barnes, 2008). No Yes 3. Conflicting/confusing, unclear expectations ((Hamilton, 2005; Hill, 2004; Price & Cotton, 2006; Sorcinelli, 1994). Yes Yes 4. Workload expectations for teaching, research, & service for Research I / other universities respectively (Greene et al., 2008 / Davis et al., 2006). 53%, 37.5%, 9.5% 40% / 55%. 40% / 26%, 20% / 18% 5. Work well over 40 hours a week and also over the weekends (Link et al., 2008; Toews & Yazedjian, 2007). Yes Yes 6. Heavy teaching load provide less time for research (Levine, 2007; Milem et al., 2000; Walker et al., 2008). Yes Yes 7. Teaching important but research necessary to secure tenure (Price & Cotton, 2006; Toews & Yazedjian, 2007). Yes Yes 8. Six to twelve journal articles required, mostly peer reviewed, for t enure in research universities (Price & Cotton, 2006). Unclear Yes 9. Barriers to employment and retention of minority faculty (Stanley, 2006; Diggs et al., 2009). No Yes 10. Gender discrimination (Bellas & Toutkoushion, 1999; Wolfinger et al., 2009). N o Yes 11. Feeling of social isolation due to language and cultural barriers (Lewallen et al. (2003). Only one reported, although it is apparent for spouses Yes 12. Assigned mentors (Greene et al., 2008). 33% 50% 13. Married faculty find it difficult to balance work and family responsibilities (Bellas & Toutkoushian, 1999; Lang, 2005) Yes Yes
122 Table 5 2. Findings of the Study Based on Theoretical Framework/Perspective Key points of Theory Findings Theory confirmed or refuted Multiculturalism (Spring, 2008) An interplay of individualistic and collectivist cultures can help individuals understand cultural differences. All the participants, based on their stay in the U.S., expressed awareness and understanding of the cultural differences that existed between their culture and that of the U.S. Confirmed Multicultural person (Nieto, 2004) A multicultural person emphasizes pluralismand can adjust and adapt to both cultures Other than one participant from Korea, all the others seemed quite o pen minded and felt at home with the interplay of different cultures Confirmed Frame switching (Fitzsimmons, 2007) Bicultural frame switching refers to subconsciously switching between cultural frames that both reside within the individual Apart from the Korean participant none of the others mentioned any problems mixing up and attending meetings or parties whether in their own culture or that of their schools Confirmed Code switching (Molinsky, 2007) In linguistics, code switching is the concurrent use of more than one language, or language variety, in conversation Most of the participants knew two or more languages, and the researcher heard at least three of the participants taking phone calls during interviews and using English expr essions while using their own languages Confirmed
123 Table 5 2. Continued Key points of Theory Findings Theory confirmed or refuted Acculturation/assimilation (Spring, 2008) It takes a greater intellectual effort to acculturate than to assimilate. The participants, subject to their intellectual growth during their studies and professional experience, appear to have acculturated well in the U.S. environment where as their spouses who have not interacted with the American culture have neither accu lturated nor assimilated Confirmed Language as a predictor for depression and unemployment (Beiser & Hou, 2001). Language plays an important part in the employment process, and is a predictor for depression for those who do not get absorbed in the l abor market in the early years of resettlement Language and unemployment caused depression in terms of a divorce possibility for one participant. It was also an apparent cause of discord for another. Two other spouses were still struggling with langua ge and were leading a domesticated life. Confirmed Immigration and gender (Spring, 2008) For many immigrant women, the United States provides an opportunity for self assertion and a break from former servile roles This feeling of equality and s elf worth was expressed by all the three female participants of the study. Confirmed
124 Table 52. Continued Key points of Theory Findings Theory confirmed or refuted Racial discrimination (Nieto, 2004) The interplay of different cultures and races bring forth racial discrimination that exists in educational as well as other institutions of society (Nieto, 2004). None of the participants mentioned any kind of racial discrimination they experienced during their studies or while working in th e Research I University. Refuted Culturally competent helping professional (Sue & Sue, 2004) Presence of a culturally competent helping professional who is aware, actively attempts to understand the worldviews, and develops and practices appropriate relevant, and sensitive interventional strategies for the culturally different client None of the participants indicated an on campus/departmental presence of such an individual who could facilitate and address their cultural problems and needs R efuted
125 APPENDIX A UFIRB 02 SOCIAL & BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH UFIRB 02 SOCIAL & BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH Protocol Submission Title of Protocol: Perceptions and experiences of the socialization processes among early career foreign national tenure accrui ng faculty in a Research I University. Principal Investigator: Mueen Aizaz Zafar UFID #: 82325331 Degree / Title: Ph.D Student / Grad Assistant Department: Educational Administration & Policy Mailing Address: 2901 SW 13th street, Apt 246, Gaines ville, FL 32608 Email Address & Telephone Number: firstname.lastname@example.org / 352682 3128(cell) Supervisor: Dr. Linda S. Behar Horenstein UFID#: 2100 4150 Degree / Title: Ph.D / Distinguished Professor Department: Educ ational Administration & Policy Mailing Address: PO Box 117046,Gainesville, FL 32611 Email Address & Telephone Number: "Dr. Linda Behar Horenstein"
126 Describe Potential Benefits and Anticipated R isks: ( If risk of physical, psychological or economic harm may be involved, describe the steps taken to protect participant.) There are no significant anticipated risks involved in this study. Potentially the procedure puts nontenured faculty at risk if they were to say anything negative about their university. However, to thwart that risk special effort will be made to omit references such as name, department, and university from all recordings and field notes. Participants who wish to withdraw from this study may do so at any time. Benefits may include possible suggestions/findings evolving out of the research which may be useful for higher education institutions in improving necessary socialization processes for early career foreign national tenure track faculty members. The findings may also provide direction to other early career foreign national faculty on the utility of socialization processes and the need to seek necessary support from their own institutions. Data obtained from this study will be properly secured by the researcher and destroyed upon completion of the study. Describe How Participant(s) Will Be Recruited, the Number and AGE of the Participants, and Proposed Compensation: 6 adults (3 male and 3 female) participants (25 years and older) will be recruited using deliberative sampling based on the following criteria: 1. Foreign national faculty members 2. Tenure track faculty members serving in Research I universities 3. Faculty members who are in early career tenure accruing stage (0 3 years), performing the roles of teaching, research, and service 4. Have been in the U.S. for at least three years 5. May have come from other universities or are a direct hire in their current universities Participants will be recruited from different departments of the University of Florida on the basis of referrals and will be invited to the study through direct contact / emails. There is no compensation for participation in this study. Describe the Informed Consent Process. Include a Copy of the Informed Consent Docu ment: Once approval for this IRB is received the researcher will contact participants using deliberative sampling. The researcher will meet the participants prior to beginning the study and explain the purpose of the study, their role in the study and the use of the consent form. The participants will then be invited to participate in the study. A copy of the consent form will be provided to the participants prior to the interviews and a signed copy will be obtained by the researcher. Principal Investigato rs Signature: Supervisor Signature: Department Chair/Center Director Signature: Date:
127 APPENDIX B INFORMED CONSENT Protocol Title: Perceptions and experiences of the socialization processes among early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty in a Research I University. Please read this consent document carefully before deciding to participate in this study. Purpose of the research study: The purpose of this study will be to explore: The perceptions and experiences of the socialization proce sses among the early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty in a Research I University located in the southeastern part of the U .S. What you will be asked to do in the study: I request permission to interview you to gain an understanding of your perceptions and experiences about the socialization processes provided to you by your department/university. The first interview will be followed up by a shorter second interview to verify interpretations / seek clarifications or probe for more information on specific issues. There will also be a short survey which will be given to you at the end of the first interview. With your permission, the interviews will be recorded, and field notes will be taken during the interview session. Only the researcher w ill have access to these field notes and audio tapes, and they will be destroyed after the study is completed. Time required: First interview: Between 45 60 minutes of your time will be required. Short survey: About 10 15 minutes of your time will be required Follow up interview: Between 30 60 minutes of your time will be required. Risks and Benefits: Potentially the procedure puts nontenured faculty at risk if they were to say anything negative about their university. However, to thwart that risk special effort will be made to omit all references such as name, department, and university from recordings and field notes Benefits may include possible suggestions/findings evolving out of the research which may be useful for higher education inst itutions in improving necessary socialization processes for early career foreign national tenure track faculty members. The findings may also provide direction to other early career foreign national faculty on the utility of socialization processes and the need to seek necessary support from their own institutions. Compensation: There is no financial compensation for your participation.
128 Confidentiality: Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law. You will be assigned a pseudonym. The list connecting your name to this pseudonym will be kept confidential by the researcher. When the study is completed and the data have been analyzed, the list will be destroyed. Your real name will not be used in any report. The final results will be presented as part of a PhD dissertation and in educational journals and magazines for possible publication. Voluntary participation: Your participation in this study is completely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating. Moreover refusal t o participate will not affect standing at the university. Right to withdraw from the study: You have the right to withdraw from the study at anytime without consequence. You do not have to answer any question you do not want to answer. Whom to contact if you have questions about the study: Mueen Aizaz Zafar, College of Education, Higher Education Administration, Norman Hall, University of Florida, Gainesville, Fl. email@example.com Home address in the United States: 2901 SW 13th Street, Apt 246, Gainesville, FL 32608. Phone# 3526823128 Whom to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study: UFIRB02 Office, Box 112250, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 326112250; phone 3920433. Agreement : I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree to participate in the procedure and I have received a copy of this description. Participant: _______________________________________Date: __________________ Interviewer: _______________________________________Date: __________________
129 APPENDIX C I NTERVIEW 1 PROTOCOL 1. What made you come into the professoriate? 2. What brought you to this university? 3. What kinds of experiences did you have before coming to this university? 4. What significant experienc es have you had as you transitioned into a tenure accruing position in this university? 5. It has been stated that certain situations impact professors experiences such as culture, language, family, and personal life among others. Would you like to share anything about these factors? 6. What information or communication have you received about teaching? 7. What information or communication have you received about research? 8. What information or communication have you received about service? 9. Is there anything else t hat you may like to share? Thank you so much for participating
130 APPENDIX D I NTERVIEW 2 PROTOCOL 1. What factors influence the percentages of time you spend on: (a) teaching, (b) research and (c) service? 2. Can you describe the *socialization processes that you have experienced in your: (a) department, (b) college, and (c) university 3. What is the information and communication that you have received as well as the unspoken expectations about: (a) teaching, (b) conducting your research, and (c) perfo rming service 4. Is there a difference between stated policies around tenure and promotion and your experiences Is there anything else that you may like to share? Thank you so much for participating *S ocialization: an organizational process that a llows individuals to learn about the culture, practices, values, jargon, attributes, procedures, and expectations of the dominant culture. I n addition it informs new comers about their work group, the specific people they work with on a daily basis, their own role in the organization, the skills needed to do their job, both formal procedures and informal norms. S ocialization functions as a control system in that the fresh hires learn to internalize and perform organizational practices and priorities.
131 APPEN DIX E SURVEY Please mark X in the applicable column Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree 1. Are you able to perform your responsibilities well as they relate to teaching? Comments: 2. Are you able to perform your responsib ilities well as they relate to research? Comments: 3. Are you able to perform your responsibilities well as they relate to service? Comments:
132 4. What percentage (100%) of your time do you spend on: (a) teaching: (b) research: (c) servic e: Comments: 5. What classes do you teach? 6. How long are your classes? 7. What is the frequency of your classes? 8. How much time do you need to prepare for each class? Thank you so much for participating
133 APPENDIX F RECRUITMENT EMAIL Recruit ment Letter To Research I University Faculty, My name is Mueen Zafar, and I am doing a qualitative research study for my PhD dissertation in Higher Education Administration in the College of Education at the University of Florida. I am seeking to intervie w early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty members working in Research I Universities. The purpose of this study will be to explore: The perceptions and experiences of the socialization processes among early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty in a Research I University located in the southeastern part of the U .S. You will be requested to participate in two individual interviews. The first interview will last between 45 to 60 minutes, and the follow up interview may take between 30 to 60 minutes. There will also be a very short survey which will take between 10 to 15 minutes of your time. There is no compensation for participation. It is expected that this research will generate knowledge that will help other early career foreign national tenure accruing faculty to adjust at U .S Research I universities. The eligibility criteria for the participants are as follows: 1. Foreign national faculty members 2. Tenure track faculty members serving in Research I universities 3. Faculty members who are in early career tenure accruing stage (0 3 years), performing the roles of teaching, research, and service 4. Have been in the U .S for at least three years 5. May have come from other universities or are a direct hire in their current universities If you are interested to participate in this research, please reply to: Mueen Zafar: firstname.lastname@example.org 3526823128
134 Thank you for your kind consideration. Sincerely, Mueen Zafar P h.D. Candidate Higher Education Administration College of Education University of Florida
135 LIST OF REFERENCES Baker Fletcher, K., Carr, D., Menn, E., & Ramsay, N. J. (2005). Taking stock at midcareer: Challenges and opportunities for faculty. Teaching Theology & Religion, 8(1), 310. Balogun, J. A., & Sloan, P. E. (2006). Emerging trends on tenure policies and practices in nursing and allied health education. Journal of Allied Health, 35(3), 134141. Barbour, R. S. (1998). Mixing qualitative methods: Quality assurance or qualitative quagmire? Qualitative Health Research, 8(3), 352361. Behar Horenstein, L. S. (2010). Transitioning from student to professor [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from class handouts. Behar Horenstein, L. S., Zafar, M. A., & Roberts, K. W. (in press). Impact of Faculty Development on Physical Therapy Professors' Beliefs. Journal of Faculty Development Beiser, M. & Hou, F. (2001). Language acquisition, unemployment and depressive disorder among Southeast Asian refugees: a 10 year study. Social Science & Medicine 53 (10), 13211334. Bellas, M. L., & Toutkoushian, R. K. (1999). Faculty time allocations and research productivity: Gender, race and family effects. The Review of Higher Education, 22(4), 367390. Bigler, M. (2007) Exploratory study of distress among spouses of international students. (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Florida. Retrieved June 6, 2011 from http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl%3furl_ver=Z39.882004%26res_dat=xri:pqdiss%26 rft _val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:dissertation%26rft_dat=xri:pqdiss:3300712 Bland, C. J., Center, B. A ., Finstad, D. A., Risbey, K. R., & Staples, J. G. (2005). A theoretical, practical, predictive model of faculty and department research productivity. Academic Medicine, 80(3), 225237. Blas, J. & Blas, J. (2004). Handbook of Instructional Leadership. 2nd Ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Blomquist, L. (2009). Language and Identity: Attitudes towards code switching in the immigrant language classroom. Degree Thesis, Department of Language Studies, UMEA University. Bode, R. K. (1999). Mentoring and coll egiality. In R. J. Menges (Ed.), Faculty in new jobs: A guide to settling in, becoming established, and building institutional support (118144). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Bogotch, I., & MaslinOstrowski, P. (2010). Internationalizing educational leadership: How a university department jumps the curve from local to international. Educational Administration Quarterly, 46(2), 210 240.
136 Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (3rd ed.). Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon. Boice, R. (2000). Advice for new faculty members. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities for the professoriate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Bradley, G. (2007). Job tenure as a moderator of stressor strain relations: A comparison of experienced and new start teachers. Work & Stress, 21 (1), 48 64. Byrne, J P. (2006). Constitutional academic freedom after Grutter: Getting real about the "four freedoms" of a university. University of Colorado Law Review, 77(4), 929953. Chang, H. (2004). Marital relationships in Taiwanese international students: A qualitative approach (Chinese). Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 64(12A), 4367. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. London : Sage Publications Cooper, J.E., & Stevens, D. D. (2002). The journey toward tenure. In J. E. Copper & D. D. Stevens (Eds.), Tenure in the sac red grove (pp. 315). New York: State University of New York Press, Albany. Creamer, E. G. (1995). The scholarly productivity of women academics. Initiatives, 57 (1), 19. Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications. Davis, T., E., Levott, D., H., McGlothlin, J., M. & Hill, N., R. (2006). Perceived expectations related to promotion and tenure: A national survey of CACREP program liaison. Counselor Education & Supervision, 46 146156. Diggs, G., GarrisonWade, D., Estrada, D., & Galindo, R. (2009). Smiling faces and colored spaces: The experiences of faculty of color pursing tenure in the academy. Urban Review, 41(4), 312333. Dreher, G.F., & Ash, R.A. (1990). A comparative study of mentoring among men and women in managerial, professi onal, and technical positions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 539546. DuPree, W. J, White, M. B, Meredith, W. H., Ruddick, L. & Anderson, M. P. (2009). Evaluating scholarship productivity in COAMFTE accredited PhD programs. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 35 (2), 204219.
137 Eddy, L. L. (2007). Evaluation research as academic scholarship. Nursing Education Perspectives, 28 (2), 7781. Emmer, E. T., Evertson, C., Clements, B., & Worsham, M. (1997). Classroom management for secondary teachers (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Fearn Banks, K. (2004). Professional to professor: Nine things you need to know. Public Relations Quarterly, 49(2), 25. Fitzsimnons, S. (2007). Seeing life through bicultural frames: Real life primes for bicultural frame Switching. Journal of the Institute for the Humanities 160172. Foote, K. E., Li, W., Monk, J. & Theobald, R. (2008). Foreignborn scholars in U .S universities: Issues, concerns, and strategies. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 32(2).167178. Fritz, M. V., Chin, D. & DeMarinis, V. (2008). Stressors, anxiety, acculturation and adjustment among international and North American students. Retrieved June 11, 2011 from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0147176708000023 Gappa, J. M., Austin, A. E., & Trice, A. G. (2007). Rethinking faculty work: Higher educations strategic imperative. San Francisco: Wiley. Gillespie, D., Dolak, N., Kochis, B., Krabill, R., Lerum, K., Peterson, A., et al. (2005). Research circles: Supporting the scholarship of junior faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 30 (3), 149162. Glesne, C. (2006). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (3rd ed.). Pearson Education Inc. Goetz, J. P., & LeCompte, M. D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research Orlando Fl.: Academic Press. Golafshani, N. (2003). Understanding reliability and validity in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report 8 ( 4), 597 607. Goldsmith, J. A, Komlos, J., & Schine Gold, P. (2001). The Chicago guide to your academic career: A portable mentor for scholars from graduate school through tenure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Grbich, C. (2007). Qualitative data analysis: An introduction. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Green, R. G. (2008). Tenure and promotion decisions: The relative importance of teaching, scholarship, and service. Journal of Social Work Education, 44(2), 117127.
138 Greene, H. C., O'Connor K. A., Good, A. J., Ledford, C. C., Peel, B. B., & Zhang, G. (2008). Building a support system toward tenure: Challenges and needs of tenure track faculty in colleges of education. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning, 16(4), 429447. Guba, E G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation. Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches San Fransisco: Jossey Bass. Hamilton, K. (2005). Getting off the burnout track? Diverse Issues in Higher E ducation, 22(20), 2631. Hardwick, S. W. (2005). Mentoring early career faculty in geography: Issues and strategies. Association of American Geographers, 57(1), 21 27. Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in educational settings Albany, New York: State University of New York Press. Harvey, L. C., & Thompson, K. (2009). Maintaining your research mojo. Chronicle of Higher Education, 55(29), A40A41. Higgins, S. E., & Welsh, T. S. (2009). The tenure process in LIS: A survey of LIS/IS program directors. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science, 50(3), 176189. Hill, N.R. (2004). The challenges experienced by untenured faculty members in counselor education: A wellness perspective. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44, 135146. Hoepfl, M. C. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology education researchers. Journal of Technology Education, 9 (1), 4763. Hollenshead, C., & Thomas, G. D. (2001). Resisting from the margins: The coping strategies of Black wom en and other women of color faculty members at a research university. Journal of Negro Education, 70 (3), 166175. Ivey, A. E., DAndrea, M. Ivey, M. B., & SimekMorgan, L. (2002). Theories of Counseling and Psychotherapy: A multicultural perspective, (5th ed.). Allyn and Bacon. Katz, S. N. (2006). What has happened to the professoriate? Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(7), B8B11. Kirkpatrick, J., Richardson, C., Schmeiser, D., Schafer, K. S., Valley, J., & Yehle, K. T. (2001). Building a case for promotion of clinical faculty. Nurse Educator, 26(4), 178181. Kuykendall, J., A., Johnson, S., D., Laird, T., F., N., Ingram, T., N., Niskode, A., S. (2006). Finding time: An examination of faculty of color workload and noninstructional activities by rank. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the association for the study of higher education, Anaheim, CA.
139 Lang, J. M. (2005). Life on the tenure track: Lessons from the first year. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press. Lang, J. M. (2008). On course: A weekby week guide to your first semester of college learning Harvard University Press. Lee, D. (2007). On the tenure track: Strategies for success. College & Research Libraries News, 68(10), 626661. Lavender, R., NguyenRodr iguez S., T., & Spruijt Metz, D. (2010). Teacing the whole student: Perceived academic control in college art instruction. Studies in Art Education 51(3) 198218. Lee, J. J., & Rice, C. (2007). Welcome to America? International student perceptions of discrimination. Higher Education, 53, 381409. Levine, A. (2007). Educating researchers Washington, D.C.: The Education Schools Project. Retrieved January 5, 2009 from http://www.edschools.org/Educating Researchers/educatingresearchers.pdf Lewallen, L. P., Crane, P. B., Letvak, S., Jones, E., & Hu, J. (2003). An innovative strategy to enhance new faculty success. Nursing Education Perspectives, 24(5), 257260. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Link, A. N., Swann, C. A., & Bozeman, B. (2008). A time allocation study of university faculty. Economics of Education Review, 27(4), 363374. Li Ping T. T., & Chamberlain, M. (2003). E ffects of rank, tenure, length of service, and institution on faculty attitudes toward research and teaching: The case of regional state universities Journal of Education for Business, 79(2), 103110. McCormick C. B. & Barnes, B., J. (2008). Getting started in academia: A guide for educational psychologists. Educational Psychological Review, 20, 518. Merriam, S. B. (1995). What can you tell from an N of I?: Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 4 5160. Mignor, D. (2000). Who is going to teach undergraduate clinicals? Nursing Forum, 35(3), 2124. Milem, J. F., Berger, J. B. & Dey, E. L. (2000). Faculty time allocation: A study of change over twenty years. The Journal of Higher Education, 71 (4), 454475.
140 Molinski, A. (2007). Cross cultural code switching: The psychological challenges, of adapting behavior in foreign cultural interactions. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 622640. Neumann, A., & Terosky, A. L. (2007). To give and to receive: Recently tenured professors' experiences of service in major research universities. Journal of Higher Education, 78 (3). Nieto, S. (2004). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Nowicki,S., Duke, M., Sisney, S., Strickler, B., & Tyler, M. (2004). Reducing the dropout rates of at risk high school students: The effective learning program (ELP). Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 130, 225240. OLeary D. P. (2009). A professorship in your future? http://www.cs.umd.edu/~oleary/gradstudy/ node12.html. Accessed July 11, 2010. Oritz, A. M. (2003). The ethnographic interview. In S.K. Stage & K. Man ning (Eds.), Research in the College Context: Approaches and Methods (pp. 3548), New York: Brunner Routledge. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. 282310. Pearson, L., FonsecaGreber, B. & Foell, K. (2006). Advanced proficiency for foreign language teacher candidates: What can we do to help them achieve this Goal? Foreign laugage Annals, 39(3), 507519. Pederson, P. B. (1991). Counseling international students. The Counse ling Psychologist, 19(1), 1058. Perna, L., W. (2001). Sex and race differences in faculty tenure and promotion. Research in Higher Education, 42 (5), 4167. Perry, R.(2003). Percived (academic) control and causal thinking in achievement settings. Can adian Psychologist. 44, 312331. Phillips, D. C. (1990). Subjectivity and objectivity: An objective inquiry. In Eisner and Peshkin (Eds.) Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate (pp. 1937). New York: Teachers College Press. Poland, B. D. (1995). Transcription quality as an aspect of rigor in qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 1, 290 310. Price, J., & Cotten, S. R. (2006). Teaching, research, and service: Expectations of assistant professors. American Sociologist, 37(1), 521.
141 Remler, D. K., & Pema, E. (2009). Why do institutions of higher education reward research while selling education? National Bureau of Economic Research, working paper 14974. Rice, E.R. (1991). The New American Scholar. Metropolitan Universities. Spring. Robbins, S., Lauver, K., Le, H., Langley, R., Davis, D., & Carlstrom, A. (2004). Do psychosocial and study skill factors predict college outcomes? A meta analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 261288. Ropella, P. B. (2008). Human capital management: Satisfied employees are productive employees. Retrieved May 11, 3011 from http://www.biodieselmagazine.com/articles/20 65/humancapital management satisfied employees areproductive employees/ Rotter, J. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcements. Psychological Monographs 80, Whole No. 609. Santo, S. A., Engstrom, M. E ., Reetz, L., Schweinle, W. E., & Reed, K. (2009). Faculty productivity barriers and supports at a school of education. Innovative Higher Education, 34(2), 117129. Shea, P. & Bidjerano, T. (2010): Learning presence Towards a theory of self efficacy, self regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Computers & Education 5, 17211731. Sleeter, C. E. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools: Research and the overwhelming pre sence of Whiteness. Journal of Teacher Education 52 (2), 94106. Solem, M. C. & Foote, K. E. (2006). Concerns, attitudes, and abilities of earlycareer Geography faculty. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 30(2), 199234. Sorcinelli, M. D. (1994). Effective approaches to new faculty development. Journal of Counseling & Development, 72, 474 479. Spring, J. (2008). The intersection of cultures: Multicultural education in the United States and the global economy, (4th ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Stanley, C. A. (2006 a). Coloring the Academic Landscape: Faculty of Color Breaking the Silence in Predominantly White Colleges and Universities. American Educational Research Journal, 43(4), 701736. Stanley, C. A. (2006 b). Faculty of colo r: Teaching in predominately white colleges and universities. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company, Inc. Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Success intelligence. New York: Plume.
142 Sue, D. W. (2001). Multidimensional facets of cultural competence. The Counseling Psychologist, 29(6), 790821. Sue, D. W. & Sue, D. (2004). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice, (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Sumer, S., Poyrazli, S. & Grahame, K. (2008). Predictors of depression and anxiety among international students Journal of Counseling & Development, 86, 429437. Terano, M. (2007). Effective programming for international students based on their perceived social and cultural needs (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Pittsburgh. Terpstra D. E., & Honoree, A. L. (2009), The effects of different teaching, research, and service emphases on individual and organizational outcomes in higher education institutions. Journal of business, 84 (3), 169176. Teshome, Y., & Osei Kofi, N. (2011). Critical issues in international education: Narratives of spouses of international students. Journal of Studies in International Education, xx (x), 113 Tierney, W. G., & Benison, E. M. (1996). Promotion and tenure: Community and socialization in academe. New York: State Un iversity of New York Press. Toews, M. L., & Yazedjian, A. (2007). The three ring circus of academia: How to become the ringmaster. Innovative Higher Education, 32( 2), 113122. Walker, J. D., Baepler, P., & Cohen, B. (2008). The scholarship of teaching and learning paradox: Results without rewards. College Teaching, 56(3), 183189. Winne, P. H. (2005). A perspective on state of the art research on self regulated learning. Instructional Science, 33 559565. Wise, H. H., Brotherton, S. S., & Mitcham, M. D. (2008). From scholarly teaching to the scholarship of teaching: A retrospective look at strategies that foster the transition of scholarly work in allied health into credible forms of scholarship. Journal of Allied Health, 37(1), e5068. Wolfinger, N. H., Mason, M. A., & Goulden, M. (2008). Problems in the pipeline: Gender, marriage, and fertility in the ivory tower. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(4), 388405. Woolfolk, A. E., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Prospective teachers sense of efficacy a nd beliefs about control. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 8191. Yi, K. Y., Lin, J., & Kishimoto, Y. (2003). Utilization of counseling services by international students. Journal of Instructional Psychology 30(4), 333342.
143 Youn, T. I. K., & P rice, T. M. (2009). Learning from the experience of others: The evolution of faculty tenure and promotion rules in comprehensive institutions. The Journal of Higher Education, 8 (2), 204237. Zapp, P. (2007). A jobs a job. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(27), 204237. Zimbardo, P. G. (1985). Psychology and Life Glenview, IL: Scott Foreman and Company.
144 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Mueen Aizaz Zafar was born in 1959 in Rawalpindi, Pakistan. In addition to his doctrate, he possesses two m aster s and two bachelor s degrees. The m aster s degrees are in Development Policy and Planning (UK), and Business Administration (IBA, Karachi, Pakistan). He has served the Banking sector for many years and was serving the MCB Bank Ltd Pakistan (20012006) as Senior Vice President overseeing their Training and HR operations when he came to Gainesville in 2006. He has worked in academia where he served as the Department Chair of Business Administration in the International Islamic University, Islamabad, Pakistan (1997200 1), and has taught business related courses for over ten years in universities such as Bahria, Iqra, Arid agriculture, Islamic University and Thames Business School in Pakistan In his stint with the MCB he headed the Banks Training Center North, and i n addition to handling the HR responsibilities, supervised and also personally conducted soft skill / management related training programs. During his stay in the U .S he worked with the Department of Housing and Residence Education, University of Florida in different administrative capacities. During his PhD program Mueen had his family with him in Gainesville, Florida. His daughters Sana and Sarah recently completed associate degree, and high school respectively, and his son finished grade six. His wife is completing her PhD from the University of Florida