EXPLORING SELF EFFICACY OF FACULTY PARTICIPATING IN A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CERTIFICATION PROGRAM By APRIL BAILEY RANERI A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMEN T OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2017
2017 April Bailey Raneri
I dedicate this work to my husband, Michael, who provided continual support and encouragem ent throughout this process; to my mother, Susan, who inspired me throughout my life to work hard and achieve my goals; and to my two daughters, Ella and Avery, for whom I hope to have set a good example.
4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This dissertation was the produ ct of a lot of hard work and an incredible support system M any individuals were involved in providing me with a team of support that led to my ability to focus on my research while maintaining a full time professor position and raising a wonderful family. First, I need to thank my Chair, Dr. Cliff Haynes for his constant counsel and guidance. M y committee, Dr. Diane Porter Roberts, Dr. Dale Campbe ll, and Dr. Albert Ritzhaupt provided truly valuable insight and took careful consideration with their recomme ndations. Their varied expertise helped to shape this work. A thank you to my editor, Wendy Thornton, for helping sharpen and perfect my ideas. Dr. Mike Bosley assisted in making sure I was able to make valuable use of my time and focus on my research His consistent support and words of encouragement helped me to press on through during the most difficult phases of the dissertation experience. The support of Claudine Bentham, Dr. Jennifer Keefe and Dr. Nichole Shorter was valuable, appreciated, and helped to shape this work and my ideas throughout the entire process. I am thankful to have such dedicated colleagues who were willing to share their dissertation experience and assist me in the process of developing my own. Finally, I need to thank the 2014 LEA D Cohort. Their constant reassurance and encouragement helped me more than they will ever know. We started off as strangers from all over the world and we become friends. We shared laughter and tears. While we worked individually, we never worked alone. We have shared an experience like no other an experience that could be researched in itself. I would especially like to recognize Bhuvaneswari Gudapati for knowing exactly what to say and when to say it t o
5 help me through this journey, and Terolyn Lay, for your constant reminders and making sure I completed everything to graduate on time. It is the culmination of this team and this amazing support system that has allowed me to develop my skills and focus on my research at one of the busiest times of my life. I started this journey while 8 months pregnant, the mother of a 3 year old, a wife, a college professor on a tenure track journey, and much more. This work would not have been possible without the support of everyone around me. I am forever in debt to all of you for making this goal a reality.
6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 10 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 13 Background of the Problem ................................ ................................ .................... 13 Statement of the Problem ................................ ................................ ....................... 14 Significance of the Study ................................ ................................ ........................ 15 Conceptual Frameworks ................................ ................................ ......................... 18 Social Cognitive Theory ................................ ................................ .................... 18 Symbolic interactionism ................................ ................................ .................... 18 Research Questions ................................ ................................ ............................... 19 2 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................ ................................ .......................... 20 Faculty Development in Higher Education ................................ .............................. 20 Challenges to Faculty Development ................................ ................................ ....... 21 The Faculty Role ................................ ................................ .............................. 21 External Source Accountability ................................ ................................ ......... 23 Adjunct Faculty Increase ................................ ................................ .................. 24 I nstitutional Changes ................................ ................................ ........................ 26 Social cognitive theory ................................ ................................ ............................ 26 Self Identity and Self Efficacy ................................ ................................ ........... 28 Meaning ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 28 Observational Learning ................................ ................................ .................... 29 General Self Efficacy Scale ................................ ................................ .............. 29 Symbolic interactionism ................................ ................................ .......................... 30 The Approach ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 30 Five Focuses ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 34 Understanding Experiences ................................ ................................ ............. 36 Understanding Behavior ................................ ................................ ................... 37 Intrinsic Motivation ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 37 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 39 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................ ................................ ............... 41 Setting ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 41 Institutional Setting ................................ ................................ ........................... 41
7 Professional Development Program Description ................................ .............. 42 Participant Population and Sample ................................ ................................ ......... 44 Participant Sample Demographics ................................ ................................ .......... 45 Data Collection ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 48 First Interview ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 49 Second Interview ................................ ................................ .............................. 50 Following Interviews ................................ ................................ ......................... 51 Rigor ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................... 51 Data Analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 54 Transcendental Phenomenological Approach ................................ .................. 54 Analysis Steps ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 56 Researcher Subjectivity ................................ ................................ .......................... 60 4 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 63 Participant Stories ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 63 Jerrica ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 63 Shana ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 68 Raja ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 71 Susan ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 74 Kimber ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 77 Carmen ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 79 Howard ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 82 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 85 Themes ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 85 Motivation for Course Participation ................................ ................................ ... 86 Time and Space ................................ ................................ ............................... 88 Small Groups for Rich Discussions ................................ ................................ .. 89 Communication Change ................................ ................................ ................... 93 Change in Curriculum Focus ................................ ................................ ............ 95 Change in Curriculum Design and Delivery ................................ ...................... 96 Change in Self Efficacy ................................ ................................ .................... 98 Theme Connection ................................ ................................ ............................... 100 5 DISCUSSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 104 Connectin g the Literature ................................ ................................ ...................... 104 Faculty Development ................................ ................................ ...................... 104 Faculty and Institutional Changes ................................ ................................ .. 105 Intrinsic Motivation ................................ ................................ .......................... 107 Research Question 1 and Social cognitive theory ................................ ................ 107 Changes Following Course ................................ ................................ ............ 108 Factors That Made Changes Possible ................................ ........................... 109 Changes in Instruction ................................ ................................ .................... 110 Changes i n Role ................................ ................................ ............................. 111 Anticipated Future Changes ................................ ................................ ........... 112 Research Question 2 and Symbolic interactionism ................................ ............... 113
8 Human as a Social Person ................................ ................................ ............. 113 Human as a Thinking Person ................................ ................................ ......... 115 Human as Defining, Affected by, and Active Beings in their Environment ...... 116 Summary ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 116 Significance of Findings ................................ ................................ ........................ 117 Implications for Practice and Policy ................................ ................................ ...... 119 Faculty Development ................................ ................................ ...................... 119 Higher Education Administrators ................................ ................................ .... 121 Implications for Theory and Research ................................ ................................ .. 124 Strengths and Limitations of the Research ................................ ........................... 125 Str engths ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 125 Limitations ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 125 Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 126 APPENDIX A PARTICIPATION REQUEST ................................ ................................ ................ 128 B CALENDAR APPOINTMENT TEXT ................................ ................................ ..... 129 C PARTICIPANT INFORMED CONSENT FORM ................................ .................... 130 D CONTEXT AND DEMOGRAPHICS QUESTIONNAIRE ................................ ....... 132 E INTERVIEW PROTOCAL FIRST INTERVIEW ................................ ..................... 133 F RELATIONSHIP: SYMBOLIC I NTERACTIONISM RESEARCH QUESTION 2 FIRST INTERVIEW ................................ ................................ ............................ 134 G INTERVIEW PROTOCAL SECOND INTERVIEW ................................ ................ 136 H RELATIONSHIP: SOCIAL COGNITI VE THEORY RESEARCH QUESTION 1 SECOND INTERVIEW ................................ ................................ ....................... 137 I JERRICA FIELD NOTES ................................ ................................ ...................... 138 J DISSERTATION THEME REVIEW AND FEEDBACK ................................ .......... 139 K UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IRB APPROVAL LETTER ................................ ........ 141 L CITRUS GROVE COMMUNITY COLLEGE IRB APPROVAL LETTER ................ 143 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................. 144 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 154
9 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3 1 Participant Interviewee Information (coded names) ................................ ............ 46 3 2 .................... 55 4 1 Timeline of Participant Communication ................................ .............................. 63 4 2 Themes Identified ................................ ................................ ............................... 86 5 1 Respondent Validation of Themes ................................ ................................ .... 118
10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 2 1 Social Learning Theory ................................ ................................ ....................... 27 2 2 Symbolic Interaction Proc ess ................................ ................................ ............. 31 3 1 Transcript sample from second interview with Howard after completion of Step 2 and 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 57 3 2 Transcript sample from firs t interview with Shana after completion of Step 2 and 3 ................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 58 3 3 Padlet sample screenshot for grouped meanings in Step 4 ............................... 59 4 1 Part icipant Experience Structure: The Connection between Themes ............... 101
11 Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the D egree of Doctor of Education EXPLORING SELF EFFICACY OF FACULTY PARTICIPATING IN A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT CERTIFICATION PROGRAM By April Bailey Raneri December 2017 Chair: Cliff Haynes Major: Higher Education Administration This research addresses how part time and full time faculty roles have changed over recent years and the role that faculty development programs ha ve played in assisting faculty with adjusting to these changes. This phenomenological study explored self efficacy formation and intri nsic motivation of inst ructors taking part in a professional development program at a community college. Social cognitive theory and symbolic interactionism were used to frame the experiences of instructors in their formation of self efficacy and intrinsic motivation throughout and following the completion of a professional development certification program that certifies faculty on their understanding, knowledge, and use, of a nationally recognized college wide student guidance program Seven participants completed a two part interview series to help understand the changes they experie nced as a result of the program and the meaning they gave to those experiences. Seven themes were found to be evident throughout the study. These themes include d : being intrin sically motivated to pa rticipat e in the course ; having the time and space to communicate with colleagues and cultivate ideas ; needing to work in small
12 groups to develop rich discussions strong relationships, and the exchange of ideas ; increased communicat ion with faculty students and the community ; increased self efficacy; changes in the curriculum focus; and changes in course de sign and delivery Finally, a discussion of the implications to higher education will help faculty development leaders understan d how to design their programs, and higher education administration leaders understand ways to use faculty development programs as a tool to communicate the values, goals, and mission of the institution.
13 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Background of the Problem F Sorcinelli, 2013, p. 85). However, according to Kowalski (2014), professional development opportunities are purely elective at the majority of institutions in the nation. Sorcinelli (2007) found that professors today face changing roles and responsibilities The expansion of faculty roles has been identified as one of the most i mportant issues facing faculty due to pressure to keep up with the new direction in which in struction and research is headed Faculty development is critical to assist them in understanding the new directions and to help them with any resources that can assist them. While full time faculty are not required to engage in faculty development opportunities at most institutions in the United States adjuncts are often not even aware of opportunities that might be available. Adjunct f aculty account for 53 % of instructors at degr ee granting institutions in the United States (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2016 ). According to Hoyt (2012) professional traini In addition, there has been a shift in the way college institutions operate, with community colleges now offering four year degrees and including undergraduate research programs. With these changes, community coll ege students now require full time and part time faculty who are well versed in current research practices. With adjunct instructors accounting for almost half of all faculty, and these faculty facing a
14 change in role it is imperative that institutions he lp all faculty meet expectations and understand their role at the institution. need for diversi development is Faculty Development is more than a domestic issue within the United States. Teachers are being given responsibilities that are beyond the normal scope of their positions and, the refore, best practices to produce quality faculty should foster these faculty members through professional development programs. Statement of the Problem Higher education leaders have increased focus on professional development programs and courses, with s everal new positions and program development dollars made available to support the creation and sustenance of faculty development programs (Herman, 2012; Sorcinelli, Austin, Eddy, & Beach, 2006). With this shift, there needs to be an understanding of the v alue of professional development programs and efficacy, classroom behavior, and curriculum may change as a result of professional development. Historically, faculty development research has focused on improving instruction through the knowledge of skills identified as bes t practices in teaching (Austin & Sorcinelli, 2013). Since i nstructors are now expected to take on various roles that contribute to being t hese development c which would increase student success (Austin, & Sorcinelli, 2013). Little research has been focused on how professional development courses might be used as a tool to create a
15 self efficacy. Course instruction has evolved over time to include not just the subject material taught, but also lessons that will help students create and achieve professional, personal, or educational goals. The literature must be updated to include an understanding of how professional development works to create instructor self identity leading to behavioral and curricular changes. In addition, with an increase in the percentage of adjunct faculty, professio nal development may serve to provide instructors with research opportunities otherwise not available on a community college campus, as well as assimilation into the culture and pedagogy valued by the institution. The intent of this phenomenological study i s to explore self efficacy formation, through the lens of social cognitive theory and to explore intrinsic motivation, through the lens of symbolic interactionism via instructors taking part in a faculty development program at a community college. Signi ficance of the Study Faculty face increas ed pressure from higher education leaders, students, parents, and additional stake holders to increase completion rates, be held accountable for both teaching practices and course completion and to change their own roles as the direction of instruction and the colleges change As suggested by McKee and Tew the instructor changing, Wood et al. (2011) suggest s that professional development can help address institutional changes. According to Jacobson (2013), faculty development courses can be offered to help adjuncts understand and participate in implementing mission.
16 Honan, Westmoreland, and Tew (2013) suggest that the importance goes beyond academic affairs and that even many board of trustee members see the link between professional development and broader academic issues. Understanding the purpose and impact of faculty development is critical for faculty development program designers when creating programs and courses. It is also important for faculty to understand how they can utilize such resources for more than classroom pedagogy as prev iously used. Herman (2012) explains that serious attention should be given to Research on how faculty development programs are being used by full and part time faculty to evaluate and poss ibly change behaviors in and out of the classroom is important for institutions to understand Such research can help improve faculty development programs and courses to meet the demands of new faculty role s at the institution. These programs and courses c an be better designed with an understanding efficacy can be affected by the participation and completion of faculty development. Understanding how professional development courses relate to practice and pedagogy can help several ke y stakeholders. Professional development instructors and designers can design their courses around the needs of faculty. They can understand how professional development courses might relate to intrinsic motivation and what factors may need to be addressed to increase intrinsic motivation and to satisfy the goals of the professional development course. In addition, both full time and part time instructors will understand the purpose of professional development when they see how it might relate to their prac tices and pedagogy.
17 Policy in higher education needs to consider not just the needs of the institution but also those of the faculty staff, and students. Institutions need to demonstrate that they value their staff at all levels. They need to make sure pr ograms are not only designed for full time tenure (or tenure tr ack) faculty, but also include adjunct faculty, which are now present in almost half of the classrooms. This can be done by ensuring that they develop the potential of their staff and by motiva ting them to become more involved in the institutions processes and outcomes. A satisfied adjunct faculty will be a more motivated faculty and will work to make the institution a success This will lead to student satisfaction in the classroom. According to Honan and Westmoreland (2013), faculty development programs are crucial to the institution and they explain: A s colleges and universities face a future of uncertain funding and demands for increased accountability and accessibility, colleges and univer but as an integral part of the fiber of the organization will position Higher educat ion administrators should use this information to further shape institutional policy in regards to faculty development. This research can help administrators when making decisions about how to allocate funds to professional development programs, courses, a nd incentives for participation among faculty. While professional development, self efficacy, and intrinsic motivation have been studied independently, they have not been studied together to further understand their relationship and the experiences of facu lty in a professional development program. In addition, this study uses the lens of s ocial cognitive theory to understand self efficacy and s ymbolic interactionism to further understand intrinsic motivation. Finally,
18 research in this area has previously f ocused on the learned skills of faculty development and the motivation to learn those skills. This study focuses on understanding the experience of the essence of change, or the thought of making changes, and how that can be used to further understand how faculty are affected by motivation and self efficacy. Conceptual Frameworks Social Cognitive T heory cognition and self efficacy can expand our knowledge of organizational behavior. We 62). Psychologist Albert Bandura developed the social cognitive theory framework as an expansion of s ocial l earning t heory eir capabilities (Luthans & Stajkovic, 1998, p. 63). Social l earning t heory also looks at the emotional motivational relevance of self identity and social interactions ( Andersen & Chen, 2002). Professional development programs aim at instructing faculty about various requirements of their work. Social cognitive theory looks at self efficacy as a necessity throughout the learning process. Symbolic interactionism While Mead (1934) first developed Symbolic interactionism as a way to predict communication and behaviors, Stryker (1987) suggests that the earliest development of s ymbolic interactionism emerge d out of the American philosophy of pragmatism. According to Cooley (190 2), sociologists needed a tool to interpret their own science. This tool would be used to explain social attitudes and behaviors.
19 According to Stryker (1987), s ymbolic interactionism active agents in constructing their own behavio rs and do so in ways that do not sustain existi (p. 93). This process includes constructing and reconstructing learned meanings. Faculty development programs work to not only educate faculty, but also motivate faculty to mak e some type of change to practice. This is often accomplished through a shared experience between the members of the course and also between the professional development course instructor and members. Symbolic interactionism helps to understand how this sh ared experience works to inform practice and lead to changes in the faculty members practice and pedagogy. Research Questions This study looked at how individuals use their self efficacy and intrinsic motivation to change or think about changing teaching practices and pedagogy. Social cognitive theory and s ymbolic interactionism will be used to frame the experiences of instructors throughout their participation in a professional development program. The following research questions were addressed: Researc h Question 1: How do instructors who complete a professional development program at a community college describe their experiences with changes in their own self efficacy? Research Question 2: How do instructors who complete a professional development pro gram at a community college describe their experiences with changes in their own intrinsic motivation?
20 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Faculty Development in Higher Education While faculty development has been seen primarily as an academic issue, there has been a change in focus (Honan, Westmoreland, & Tew, 2013). According to Austin ways 89). In addition, instructors should engage in dialogue about their own beliefs, assumptions, views, and practice in order to be a part of transformative learning (Schols 2012). When rich discussions about faculty development occur, a culture is fostered where faculty feel encouraged to regularly explore their objectives and outcomes. The d evelopment of faculty in higher administration is an intricate and impo rtant part of student success. Faculty development is necessary as societal changes take place, and teachers who are often the disseminators of information need to be able to Faculty development should be vi ewed as a necessity, not a nicety. For higher education to manage societal shifts of near epic The literature on faculty development is not as extensive as one would think and much of t he literature is very specific to certain fields in higher education, such as medicine and the sciences. There is also literature available on developing and training faculty to bridge the digital divide but literature looking at what we would term traditi onal faculty development is dated by ten to fifteen years or older in some cases.
21 Faculty development research is crucial now more than ever with a growing number of changes and challenges for institutions and faculty, including: a changing faculty role, i ncreased pressure from external sources, increased use of adjunct instructors, and rapid changes in institutions themselves. In addition, faculty development can help community college instructors engage in research while keeping current in discipline and pedagogy. Challenges to Faculty Development Historically, professional development of faculty in higher education has been more simplistic and has been about ensuring that the teacher was able to deliver material in an organized manner and assess student u nderstanding of material. et al., 2005, p. 1). This view however has evolved over the last decade and faculty development in higher e ducation is now seen more as academic development which incorporates the idea o f the instructor as more than just a teacher. The Faculty Role According to McArthur (2005), there is a consistent emphasis on the importance of faculty in affecting student retention, with increased interaction between students and faculty resulting in overall increased student satisfaction and a positive perception of the college experience. McArthur (2005) adds that the faculty member serves an important role to the student as not only a mentor, but also a role model and authority figure, According to Amundsen et al (2005) the instructor now has the role of being a scholar, a researcher, a student advisor, a member/ citizen of the faculty and department
22 they work within and even act as mentor in some instances. These multiple roles have faculty members struggling to juggle both professional and private lives to fulfill all their obligations and faculty development po licies should be reflective of these shifting paradigms. In an analysis on the review of literature on faculty development, Amundsen et al (2005) found that the reasoning behind the design of faculty activities is not clear in the literature. Academic ad vising has been described as critical to student retention and assisting students with academic and professional career success (Suvedi, Ghimire, Millenbah, Lansing, & Shrestha, 2015). Traditionally : Faculty advising has meant discipline specific faculty assign ed students for advising who have cular discipline as their major faculty and student about necessary support systems, career options, financial aid, and add itional personal and academic challenges (Williamson, Goosan, & Gonzales, 2014, p. 20). In addition, the traditional advising method has been found inefficient with a myriad of student dissatisfaction complaints (Phillips, 2013). Faculty advising has tak en on a new role with the increased understanding of how faculty advising plays an integral role in the success, satisfaction, and retentio n of students (Dillon & Fisher, 2000). According to Karr L ilienthal, Lazarowicz, McGill, and asked about what makes advising students a rewarding experience. Titus and Ballou (2013) instruct that advisors will need to be informed about the expectations of the ir role and how to be prepared as advisors that interact with students in a manner similar to mentors. Krasinskaia (2012) adds that advisors in higher education will need to be prepared for innovative transformations. According to Christensen (2016),
23 Unde rgraduate advisement is a chore that few academics want. Advising means more emails, m ore questions In a study done by Whitfield and Hickerson (2013), graduate students going into teaching scored low in their confidence of ad vising, as well as their preparation. Finally, an understanding of a generational approach to faculty advising has been recommended by Montag, Campo, Weissman, Wamsley, and Snell (2012), as they found that millennials saw improved student engagement and mo tivation when a millennial approach to best advising practices were taken. Hoyt (2012) found that faculty loyalty and intent to stay at the institution may be motivated by their intrinsic rewards. One new challenge that instructors are faced with is a chan ge in the make up of instructors, with adjunct faculty taking on a larger role in the emerging technologies for educat (2007 ) believes the development is necessary to engage instructors in conversations about curriculum that keep the curriculum current. External Source Accountability There has been a sense of greater pressure from parents, students, and stakehol ders on accounta bility for faculty members and institutions. According to Marcus (2014), universities have claimed that they have had to increase their hiring of administrators to meet the demand of government regulations. With all the new mandates, institutions have had to create compliance offices just to make sure that they have met all the regulations. The Economist (2012), claims that there has been a failure on the part of the institutions to innovate and meet mass enrollment needs, which has resulted in increased fe deral interest. In addition, institutions have found a need to
24 increase their communication with the community to promote buy in. According to Lou (2014) institutions will need to assess who their external communities are, and the role of their leaders an d faculty in engaging with these communities. Adjunct Faculty Increase Pisani and Stott (1998) found that controversy has surrounded the increased use of adjunct faculty due to concerns over the overall quality of teaching occurring in higher education. Ja coby (2006) concluded that there was a negative impact of having increased adjunct employment and that college graduation rates could be seen decreasing as the proportion of adjunct faculty increased. Professional development has been viewed as a resource to ensure quality among adjunct faculty. With adjuncts continuing to grow as the leading instructional position at colleges, faculty development programs have been used to help assimilate the adjunct to the college culture and expectations ( Strom Gottfried & Dunlap, 2004 ). According to Hoyt (2012), the greatest motivator to drive adjunct faculty stems from their work and their own personal growth. In addition, adjuncts that are called to be engaged in their improved teaching abilities experience higher job satisfaction (Hoyt, 2012). faculty is how to incorporate all types of adjuncts into faculty development programs. While many adjuncts are looking to become more involved a nd work towards a full time roll, many adjuncts have other part time positions or may even be retired and teach purely for their own intrinsic rewards of sharing their knowledge and making a difference Hayes (2009) recommend that an accurate and complete understanding of all faculty responsibilities will be important in understanding the implication on workload, recruitment, retention, and job satisfaction.
25 With the change in the instructor role and an i ncreased focus on student advising and engagement, there is concern over an increase in faculty that may not be prepared for this role. Adjunct faculty are now representing a significant number of teachers in the classroom. According to Strom Gottfried and Dunlap (2004), a downsizing of tenure track faculty is leading to an increase in the use of adjunct or contract faculty. With institutions relying more heavily than ever on utilizing adjunct faculty, the success of adjunct faculty is imperative to the suc cess of the student in the classroom. According to Jacobson (2013), adjunct faculties need a roadmap for success as an adjunct faculty addition, Jacobso successful adjunct faculty roadmap allows the adjunct community to be a part of the college ownership in achieving institutional goal According to West (2010), adjunct faculty often feel isolated as a result of being part time member s to experience the opportunity to develop relationships with their profes sional are seeing the opportunities to build relationships within the institution. According to iverse set of faculty who may have different experiences in teaching it governance At the same time, such collaborative measures can make faculty co need faculty development opportunities,
26 higher education leaders will particularly need to make sure that adjunct instructors are prepared to face the challenges currently faced at institutions and among faculty. Institutional Changes Undergraduate research programs have been increasing. With traditionally two year community colleges now offering four year degrees, undergraduate research programs are being started at the community college level. Faculty will need t o make sure they can lead students through undergraduate research and professional development as one way to keep them connected. Just as professional development as a research tool can make faculty feel connected, it can also help students feel a connecti on as well According to Brandt and Hayes (2012), undergraduate research can lead to increased retention as well as an increase in student confidence and an Social cognitive theory Social co gnitive theory can be used to understand how instructors make decisions with regard to changes in practice or participation in professional development opportunities. Understanding how instructors make decisions on behavioral changes can lead higher educat ion administrators to create and promote the conditions necessary to produce chance. Originally called s ocial l earning theory, Albert Bandura developed the framework as a way of explaining the process of learning through cognitive, behavioral, and environm ental factors. This process is illustrated in F igure 2 1.
27 Figure 2 1. Social Learning Theory (adapted from Bandura, 1977) After being developed into a more comprehensive process, social l earning t heory was developed into s ocial cognitive theory as way t o understand through observations and interactions. According to Martin (2004), t he wholistic self is central to the framework of social cognitive theory This framework works to answer social influences through five capabilities: 1) symbolizing, 2) foreth ought, 3) vicarious learning, 4) self regulation, and 5) self reflection. According to Luthans and Stajkovic (1998) it is through symbols that individuals interpret their visual experiences into internal cognitive models that guide behaviors. Using foreth ought future actions are regulated. Vicarious learning occurs through observation of others. Self r egulation occurs using self set standards and self evaluation of activities and actions. Finally, self reflection gives individuals the ability to analyze t heir own effectiveness, assumptions, environment, and realities. Through this process, individuals make decisions about future behaviors. If an environment
28 encourages observations of behaviors, then an individual can witness that behavior and the consequen ces to determine their own future actions. Self Identity and Self Efficacy Self efficacy is a major component of social cognitive theory that looks at how behavior is motivated through self influence based on attitudes towards the work environment (Harrison, Rainer, Hochwarter, & Thompson, 1997). Mills (2011) found that teacher self change in student instruction (p. 61). Individuals must have belief in their own capabilities in order to apply those capabilities to the changes in behavior. Self efficacy is an important part of social cognitive theory because an individual needs to believe in the effectiveness of their behaviors in order to change them. According to Cham b erlain Salaun et al., (2015), the 7). In order for faculty members to participate in faculty development and to change their practice they would need to believe in their own skills and their ability to affect their students and practice. Meaning cess where instructors learn how to instruct and develop effective teaching practices through the meaning they give to their instruction. It is described as a process through which the Chen (2013) proposes that the following are necessary in successful professional development programs that enhance meaning: assist in learning effectively, enable teachers to teach
29 effectively, promote a sustainable development of the teaching profession, and further the development and improvement of pedagogy. Riehle (2012) explains the importance Once a faculty member has the belief in their own capabilities, meaning can give them the intrinsic motivation to create chance. Observational Learning Strom Gottfried and Dunlap (2004) believe that professional development allows ant to employ in their Singer, and Gautreaux (2006) found that observation can influence both the behaviors and the knowledge leading to change s in behavior. Paulus, van Dam, Hunnius, L indemann, & Bekkering, 2011) suggest that the behavior can be controlled through action effect associations and that action knowledge is acquired, in part, through observational experiences. Individuals observe the actions and reactions to individuals arou nd them which leads to their own decision making on the appropriate action Observing the behavior and experiences of faculty around them can lead faculty to make similar or dissimilar decisions based on their observations of the reactions to the actions m ade by other faculty members. General Self Efficacy Scale The General Self Efficacy Scale (GSE) has been used in over 30 languages for over two decades (Jerusalem & Schwarzer, 1992; Schwarzer, 1992; Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995; Schwarzer & Scholz, 2000 ). T he scale was created by Schwarzer and Jerusalem to measure self control and change the environment around them based on their own actions The
30 researchers suggested that this scale was applicable to the general adult population (Jerusalem & Schwarzer, 1992) According to Jerusalem and Schwarzer (1995), the test can be used for a wide range of applications in understanding and predicting perceived self efficacy, but cannot measure specific changes Schwarzer and Fuchs (1996) have given recommendations on writing additional items for the scale to help in understand and predict specific behavior changes. According to Chen, Gully, and Eden (2001 ) the GSE scale can contribute to a wide range of organi zational theory and research. Romppel et al. (2013), says the GSE is considered a reliable and valid instrument to evaluate the attribute of self efficacy. They also claimed that the GSE has been used and adapted in several studies and that their ten item Romppel et al. 2013, p. 2). Symbolic interactionism The Approach While Mead first developed s ymbolic interactionism as a way to predict commu nication and behaviors, Blumer (1969), a stu dent of Mead, further developed s ymbolic interactionism and coined the term, to study human behavior and group interaction Symbolic interactionism was used to look at human behavior and how it is formed and shaped. According to Chamberlain Salaun, Mills, and Usher (2013), s ymbolic interactionism human group li fe It uses the concepts of self concept, object, and role taking to explain this process. Self c oncept uses the intra personal communication to develop the self in to two
31 perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors (Aldiabat & Le Navenec, 2011). The object includes physical, social, and abstr act objects that assist the self in constructing social meaning (Aldiabat & Le Navenec, 2011). Role takin g is described as a process of seeing the self through the perception of how others view you and shows the self as p. 1066). about the meaning of a particular type of behavior and the contextual sources of such meanings, and how they change (Aldiabat & Le Navenec, 2011, p. 1068). Burbank and Martins (2009) illustrate the process in F igure 2 2. Figure 2 2. Symbolic Interaction Process (adapted from Charon, 2007) Through this process, meani ng constantly evolves and interactions with others continuously change the perceptions and meanings of symbols. Aldiabat and Le Interaction Reference Group Perspective Defines Situation Action Interpretation of Action Alters Perspective, Definition, Action
32 Navenec (2011) suggest that s ymbolic interactionism means that humans live in a symbolic world of learned meanings, human behavi or is based on these meanings, meanings are modified through an interpretive process, the self develops through social interactions, and the self provides a motive for behavior. This causes the actions to be dependent on the symbols and the meaning the sym bols are given. The theory does not describe the variances that individuals may have in social interactions and the assumption is that all behaviors are based on social interactions. This suggests that there are no inherent behaviors or attitudes and that all are learned through interaction. Blumer (1969) offered s ymbolic interactionism as a dissimilar approach from the mainstream research in sociology. This approach is qualitative in nature and departs from structural functionalism. Necessary to the quali tative research of Symbolic interactionism is sociological ethnography, analysis of human documents, and participant observation (Lal, 1995). This data can help in understanding collective definitions that enter into the process of interpret ation and the construction of According to Handburg et al. (2015), Symbolic interactionism ideas about how developing lines of action in all of the different and chal lenging situations they s of their own actions and, at the same time, interpreting the indications made by others (p. 1028). If all behaviors are based on social intera ctions and the self concept as by modifying the social interactions and perceptions of the institution They can also
33 modify meaning associated with the interactions and symbols of the institution. Self concept can be modified through incentive programs, rewards, and recognition. Gallant rewarded are connected to the meaning attributed to t he concepts of a leader and shaped through institutional policies and organization. While Mead first developed the foundation for s ymbolic interactionism and Blumer expand ed upon the research, Manford Kuhn and Sheldon Stryker were also instrumental in the development of s ymbolic interactionism research (Carter & Fuller, 2016). According to Carter and Fuller (2016), s ymbolic interactionism was develop level theoretical framework and perspective in sociology that addresses how society is created and maintained through repeated interactions among individuals (p. 932). In addition, Carter and Fuller (2016) discuss how Kuhn (1964) and Stryker (1980) further explored the relationship between the self and socie tal norms, viewing behavior as a socially constructed and purposeful action. According to Cater and Fuller (2016) Kuhn and Stryker differed from Mead and Blumer in their understanding of t he nature of meanings and the self in interaction They included quantitative methods to test symbolic interactions. Symbolic interactionism is traditionally known for its uses in a myriad of sociological areas. According to Carter and Fuller (2016) it h as also been found useful in a variety of sociological subfields, including the understanding of semiotics, narratives, qualitative research methodologies, sickness and health, and in understanding relationships and experiences in the work environment. The se v arious
34 disciplines have applied symbolic interactionism to further understand interactions and choices made by individuals (Carter and Fuller, 2016). Carter and Fuller (2016) found it being used to understand how individuals make health choices, unders tand the origins of public relations, find trends in gift giving, connect social context and the environment, as well as in finding how the self is constructed in the online environment. In addition, it has been used to understand a variety of social pheno mena, including the 2011 Occupy Movement, and online abortion narratives, as well as understanding an moral identity and how that affects their relationships (Carter & Fuller, 2016). Augusto (2013) used s ymbolic interactionism to understand the process for collaborative learning practice with music education. Louella (2012) used the framework to make the case that higher education institutions are currently playing a role in the community that helps to manage the image and political perceptio n of the institution. While education and the workplace environment has found a place for symbolic interactionism in understanding employee and student behaviors and choices, little research can be found using symbolic interactionism to understand faculty development programs at higher education institutions and the role those interactions play in affecting the actions of the participants. Five Focuses Working off the views of Blumer (1969), Charon (1998), described how symbolic interactionism includes five central focuses These include : 1. The human as a social person 2. The human as a thinking person 3. The human as a person defining their own environment 4. The human as a person affected by their current environment 5. The human as active beings in t heir environment.
35 First, a s a social person, humans interact with others and through this perception of how others view them. They are an object in their environment and how others interact and react to that object can help them define their place in the environment (Charon, 1998). of personal perspectives, the meaning and importance of symbols, the nature of mind a nd the self, role taking, interaction, an d According to Handburg Thorne, Midtgaard, Nielsen, and Lomborg (2015) one of the basic premises of Symbolic interactionism is that, one makes Secondly, a s a thinking person, the individual can use their cognitive abilities to analyze their interactions as a social person. Charon (1998) described how the mind and the self are linked with the mind being the thinking activity used to understand the self which is the object Through this link the human defines the environment around them and engages in the stream of action which is a constant and continuous proce ss of interaction with self and others that leads to decisions and the direction of our actions (Char on, 1998). According to Ol i ver (2012) we are definin The hu man is affected by their current environment and the interactions within it. Handburg et al. (2015) explain that individuals make choices on how to act based on the shared understanding of meaning that is determined within their environment and that the ch Finally, as act ive beings in their environment, individuals take the choices and
36 to share their fu ture course in the process of interpreting meaning (Handburg et al., 2015, p. 1025). Understanding Experiences Symbolic interactionism underlying meanings (Gallant, 2014, p. 205). Symbolic interactionism has proven the ability to help researchers understand how the self concept is formed and how it interacts socially to construct a learned meaning. This learned meaning can help predict individual and group communication and behaviors. Symbolic interactionism has been used to study applied qualitative health research and how health patients make decisions and change behaviors. Pieters, Heilemann, Grant, and Maly (2011) used Symbolic inte ractionism to further understand the experience of older women when encountering barriers to receiving care while undergoing breast cancer diagnoses, treatment, and after care. Handburg et al. (2015) used symbolic interactionism to understand the choices o f male cancer survivors and found that patients made choices on the basis of meaning and trying to reach normality corresponding with social interactions and society norms. According to Handburg et al. (2015) s ymbolic interactionism is a unique guidance m ethodology that helps to (p. 1026). This can be more helpful in understanding experiences than grounded theory which ori Handburg et al., 2015, p. 1026).
37 Understanding Behavior According to Charon (2007), the interactions that humans have are always symbolic and can help understand the many decisions that individuals ma ke and the various ways they act. Once we understand what leads individuals to make different choices and meanings, the actions they take will make sense (Handburg et al., 2015). According to Chamberlain Salaun et al. (2013), social interactions that take place lead (Chamberlain Salaun et al., 2013, p. 6). In a cyclical process, participant s continuously adapt their own actions based on what they perceive the responses and actions of others will be (Chamberlain Salaun et al., 2013 ). In addition, emotions and feelings are central to social interactions and feelings (Blumer, 1936, p. 519). The interactions that take place based on the actions are largely created on an unconscious level and are spontaneous and immediate to the current environment ( Loconto & Jones P ruett, 2006) These influences lead to the decisions about what course of action to take. Intrinsic Motivation Social cognitive theor y and s ymbolic interactionism can be used to understand the importance of social interactions in affecting change. They help to understand the ability to understand and be lieve in their own abilities, as well as to have interactions and social constructs that form meanings can lead to motivation for change. These
38 motivations are identified in research in two categories: intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. Extrin sic m otivation includes some type of external reward or reinforcement (Tabernero & Hernndez, 2011). Extrinsic m otivation like p erformance based incentives are often found to be used throughout schools and workplaces even when these methods undermine int rinsic motivation and are not found in research to increase the desired action or choice (Murayama, Matsumoto, Izuma, & Matsumoto, 2010). Murayama et al. (2010) found that the assumption that raising monetary value will increase desired behavior is not fou nd to be an accurate assumption when tested throughout the research. The research supports intrinsic motivation as a superior way to lead individuals to develop desirable behaviors. Intrinsic m arked by the interest, curiosity, continued lear ning, and a spirit of challenge experienced by an employee when stimulated by the work itself rather than external outcomes, such as rewards or Liao, & Zhang, 2014, p. 733). In addition, intrinsic motivation has been found to have a et al. (2014) found that employee job satisfaction was positively correlated to intrinsic motivation and that this type of motivation was longer last ing than other forms of motivation. Carr and Walton (2014) have found that intrinsic motivation can be fueled when individuals are encouraged to work together, as this facilitates social bonds and helps individuals accomplish goals they previously thought were beyond their own abilities. In addition, Carr and Walton (2014) found in their research that participants who were
39 encouraged to work together found greater enjoyment and interest in their tasks, greater ability to complete the tasks, and voluntarily completed similar tasks outside of the assigned work. In addition, intrinsic motivation has been found to increase student achievement (Niehaus, Rudasill, & Adelson, 2012). DePasque and Tricomi (2015) suggests that to meet the needs of the individuals in educational practices, influences on performance other than ability need to be understood and researched. DePasque and Tricomi (2015) found in their research that inst ructive efficacy of feedback over time processing the information and subsequently using the abilities when needed (p. 185). Yidong, and Xinxin (2013) found that some scholars have proved the role of intrinsic moti Summary Professional d evelopment in higher e ducation has experienced a rich diversity of programs and changes over the last several decades. The role of faculty has experienced drastic changes and an increased shift towards a culture that promotes significant faculty engagement. Faculty professional development programs have worked to assist faculty in adapting to these cultural shifts. With a n increased adjunct faculty workforce, professional development has been more valued than ever in assimilating new adjunct faculty into the culture of the institution. Social cognitive theory can be used to help understand how faculty development programs lead to the faculty perception of their own abilities and how this relates to the changes they make in their work. Symbolic interactionism can be used to
40 help analyze and predict behaviors and practices to help understand how faculty use professional devel opment programs and what changes occur as a result Symbolic interactionism can be used to understand the various connections which take place throughout a faculty development program, including online interactions, face to face interactions, interactions between program participants, interactions between participants and the program leaders, and interactions that may occur outside of the program.
41 CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This phenomenological study explore d self efficacy formation and intrinsic mot ivation of instructors taking part in a faculty development program at a community college. Social cognitive theory and s ymbolic interactionism were used to frame the experiences of instructors in their formation of self efficacy and intrinsic motivation following the completion of a pro fessional development program. This chapter is used to further understand the research methodology of this study. It will focus on the questions that were addressed in the research, the setting and participants who were use d for the research, as well as how the data was collected during and following the two part interview series. The rigor is also addressed as well as a detailed description of the seven step model that was used to analyze the data. Finally, researcher subje ctivity and additional considerations are discussed related to this research. As explained in Chapter 1, the f ollowing research questions were addressed: Research Question 1: How do instructors who complete a professional development program at a communit y college describe their experiences with changes in their own self efficacy? Research Question 2: How do instructors who complete a professional development program at a community college describe their experiences with changes in their own intrinsic mot ivation? Setting Institutional Setting Citrus Grove Community College is a public state college in the southeast serving an enrollment of almost 40,000 at five campus locations offering two year degrees, certifications, workforce development programs, and limited number of four year degrees. This institution has been awarded an Aspen Prize for Community College
42 Excellence. Citrus G rove Community College has shared the ir mission of helping their students and faculty become life long learners They provide p rofessional development classes and programs on all of their campuses to assist their faculty and sta ff in being life long learners strengthen community, and inspire individuals to excellence Three of the campuses, Orange, Rue, and Clementine are considered main campuses and house full services for students. The college consists of two smaller regional campuses, Agrume, and Pomelo, that offer courses to students with limited services. This institution has tenured faculty positions following a five year tenure track program, as well as annually appointed and adjunct faculty positions. Tenured, tenure track, and annually appointed positions are considered full time facul ty, while adjunct faculty are considered part time by the institution. Instructional p ersonnel at the college includes 416 tenured (or tenure track) faculty members, 107 full time non tenured (annually appointed) faculty members, and 1,348 adjunct instruct ors. Faculty employed at all levels of instruction are offered the development program equally with incentives varying based on contract status. While financial incentive options are available to all participants, it is the goal of this study to analyze th e intrinsic reward and motivation of the faculty. Professional Development Program Description The program chosen for research at this institution is the student guidance system certification, which provides faculty and staff the ability to be certified i n nationally recognized and replicated at other institutions. The student guidance system certification designed to support all faculty members, full time and part time, as t hey
43 expand their knowledge and integration of c ollege success s kills with the goal of enhanced student learning Program Website 2016). This program work s in a cohort model with approximately five to twenty students, comprised of facult y and staff from the college, completing thirty six hours of courses together over a one year period. New cohorts start every fall and spring semest er on the three main campuses. The two regional campuses hold new cohorts when there is a need dependent on enrollment. Faculty members may participate in a cohort on any campus, regardless of the campus they serve on. Since the first cohort started in fall 2012, a little over 100 participants have completed the certification, as of fall 2016. The program works to help faculty and staff at the college become aware of the resources that are available to students and how instructors can incorporate elements of the program into their courses. There are 32 hours of foundational coursework in the cohort model and then individual participants can choose up to four hours of elective courses to take. Foundational courses include those that look at how the program works, how to infuse college success skills into the classroom, and a capstone project that requires each part icipant to do an action research project in one of their courses or areas of work. There are 15 courses from which participants can choo se their four hours. Those courses include topics such as: student motivation, supplemental learning, assessment, critic al thinking, strategies in reading and writing, among others. Faculty design learning opportunities that promote student life skills development while enhancing discipline learning. Through intentional incl usion of growth promoting strategies, faculty will facilitate the students' gradual assumption of responsibility for making informed decisions and formulating and
44 executing their educ th e certification program has identified several faculty outcomes of completing the program: e stablish student & faculty contact that cont ributes to students' academic, p ersonal, and professional growth ; e mploy digital tools to aid student contact ; s eek out struggling students and ident ify options through dialog and a ppropriate referrals ; h elp students assume responsibility for making informed academic decisions ; g uide students in developing academic behaviors for college success ; h elp students identify aca demic behaviors that can be adapted as life skills ; and a ssist students in clarifying and developing purpose (Program Website, 2016). Participant Population and Sample Faculty and staff at Citrus Grove Community College who completed the program were invi ted to participate in this study While staff were invited to complete this program, only those instructing in some capacity, part time or full time, during their enrollment in the program, were invited to interview. This research focused on changes to ins tructor practices and pedagogy that was not applicable to staff positions who were not teaching while enrolled in the professional development program. While participants must have been teaching at least one course during their enrollment in the program an d must have completed the progr am at the time of the interview, there were no limitations to contract status, the subject of the courses taught, or the campuses the instructor taught at. Faculty and staff who have completed the program while teaching at least one course (face to face or online) were invited by email to interview as seen in Appendix A. Participants were asked to complete a two part 40 60 minute long interview series t o be conducted during the s ummer of 2 017. Once the participant expressed interest via
45 email follow up communication took place at the preference of the participant to include phone calls and emails A time and locati on convenient for the faculty member was set up It was the goal of this research to interview a minimum of si x individuals. Using between six and ten individuals allows for the breadth of experience to help identify common themes without sacrificing the depth of the interview process (Seidman, 2012). Thi s goal was exceeded and seven individuals from various disc iplines, contract status, and campuses were interviewed. Participant Sample Demographics A total of 107 participants were identified by the college as having completed the certification program from its start in 2012 through January of 2017. A total of 10 participants were found to no longer be working at the college and were without a college identified email address. This left 97 participants who were emailed with an invitation to participate in interviews if they had also taught at least one course durin g the time they completed the certification program. I received 16 responses from the 97 emails. A variety of responses were received from both those that would be able to participate and those that would have to decline for various reasons. For those who were not able to participate, a variety of reasons were given and several emailed simply to identify themselves as not meetin g the requirement and to wish me luck on my journey to research this experience. Two respondents replied that they recognized that the data was being collected over the summer term and they would not be able to participate during that term. Two responses were received after several had already set up interviews and there were scheduling conflicts that could not be remedied. In additi on, one response cited personal reasons for not being able to participate They expressed discomfort in participating due to a
46 conflict of interest related to their current position managing and funding the program. Finally, one participant was initially e ager to participate, but then fell unresponsive to follow up communication. Seven individuals were identified as those who met the requirements and would also be available to complete the two part interview process. This number exceeded the initial number identified a minimum of six participants which was necessary in order to be able to identify common themes of the experience. Over the course of six weeks I conducted 14 interviews with seven participants. These participants represented a cross section o f campuses and disciplines at the college. Table 3 1 shows the disciplines and campuses of each participant. Because some of the individuals were on a different campus or position at the time they completed the program and related to the experiences they were interviewed about, the table also notes any new positions or campuses since the completion of the program. Table 3 1. Participant Interviewee I nformation (coded names) Name Program Graduation Year Campus During Program Position During Program New Camp us/ Position Shana July, 2013 Clementine Professor of Reading, Tenure Track Professor of Reading, Tenured Howard Nov., 2015 Rue Math Adjunct Senior Lab Supervisor, Math Depot Jerrica April, 2013 Pomelo Humanities Adjunct Rue/ Agrume Title V Grant Manage r; Humanities Adjunct Carmen July, 2013 Clementine Professor of Math, Tenured Dean of Architecture, Engineering, & Technology; Math Adjunct Kimber April, 2016 Rue Speech Adjunct NSE Professor Susan Dec., 2014 Clementine Student Success/NSE Adjunct; Dual Enrollment Advisor Coordinator and Program Advisor, Behavioral & Social Sciences Raja April, 2014 Pomelo Math Adjunct, Tutor Tutor
47 Three of the five campuses were represented in the sample, including two of the main campuses, Clementine and Pomelo, an d one of the regional campuses, Rue. The table identifies the campus during completion of the program as well as any campuses taught at after completion of the program. It should be noted that Jerrica has also taught on the other regional campus, Agrume, a nd that Carmen had previously taught at the third larger campus, Orange. In this way, all the campuses were represented in some capacity. Disciplines were widely represented with participants from the following departments: reading, math, student success, speech, and humanities. The sample represented both faculty and staff with three full time faculty positions, and four staff positions. One participant, Carmen, taught classes in an Associate of Science (A.S.) program, while the other six participants tau ght courses in general education. While three of the participants, Raja, Susan, and Howard, were teaching at the time of program completion, they were not teaching at the time of the tions can teach courses. This change was a result of addressing possible state legislation changes that did not pass. It is possible that in the future, the college will change these requirements and all three participants expressed an interest in teaching again. In addition, Carmen moved into a Dean's role following completion of the program and Jerrica became a grant manager at a different campus. The college offers 7 professional development programs, consisting of several courses, and additional course s that can be taken individually. All the participants had previously completed several professional development courses with between 50 and over 300 hours of professional development. Every participant had completed at least
48 one additional program, with f our participants completing two and two participants completing three of the available programs. In addition, two of the participants were in the middle of completing a program. Data Collection Data was collected through a two p art interview series, a d emographic questionnaire completed at the beginning of the first interview as well as a feedback survey once themes from the interviews were identified. The two part interview process was g interview to explore the experience and mea ning behind the experience. The modification is a result of Seidman (2012 ) who suggests that a meeting reflecting on the experiences shoul d be held one to two week s later so the participant has time to reflect o n the previous interview about the lived experience. Both interviews followed a semi structured organization. This format provides a guide for open ended questions that set the stage for the interview, but leaves the researcher the flexibility to ask foll ow up questions as needed ( Creswell 2013) The semi structured interview techniq ue is important to the research; Whiting (2008) describes how semi intimate encounters in which open, direct, verb al questions are used to elicit detailed narratives and stories It is important to the research that only face to face interviews be completed. Irvine, Drew and Sainsbury (2012) explain that visual signals from the researcher are important in e ncouraging interviewees to elaborate or clarify what they have said, and As a communications professor, I am in tune to small non verbal signals that help me
49 understand the meaning and in tent behind the verbal communication. Because the participants were faculty at my institution, I utilized the calendar option in our email system to create appointments once the faculty member confirmed the dates and times of their interview. Appendix B sh ows the text that was used when reserving each appointment. First Interview During the first few minutes of the interview, the informed consent form (Appendix C) was reviewed and signed and the participant complete d a demog raphic questionnaire (Appendix D ). A few opening questions about the experience were developed to engage in a social conversation as recommended by Moustakas (1994). The questions from the first interview (Appendix E ) worked to collect information about the lived experience of the pheno mena, changes, or thoughts about changes, during and following the professional development course. These questions helped to answer the second research question, which attempted to comprehend the experience of change on the part of the participants and ho w this might have affected their intrinsic motivation. Symbolic interactionism is a framework that helps us to understand intrinsic motivation by understanding how individuals reconstruct their learned meanings. After the initial opening questions for thi s interview to establish a rapport, a dditional questions were created through the lens of symbolic interactionism According to Charon (1998), symbolic interactionism includes five central focuses: t he human as a social person t he human as a thinking pers on t he human as a person defining their own environment t he human as a person affect ed by their current environment and t he human as an acti ve being in their environment The questions were developed to help understand the
50 experience of the participants with regard to each of these focuses. Appendix F further shows the relationship between s ymbolic interactionism Research Q uestion 2 and the interview questions for the first interview. Second Interview According to Seidman (2012), the spacing of the in terviews should give the participant time to reflect on the first interview without losing connection between the two. The second interview s took place between one to three weeks following the first. The second interview was focused on answering Research Q uestion 1: How do instructors who complete a professional development program at a community college describe their experiences with change in their own self efficacy. Five questions (Appendix G) were created using an adaptation of the established General Self Efficacy Scale (GSE) that has been used in over 30 languages over two decades ( Jerusalem & Schwarzer, 1992; Schwarzer, 1992; Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1995; Schwarzer & Scholz, 2000) Schwarzer and Fuchs (1996) have recognized that the Likert scale ques tions may need to be adapted to understand specific behaviors and have provided a guide to adapting these questions. This guide was utilized to create the open ended questions. The Likert scale questions of the original GSE were adapted into open ended que stions that explore d own self efficacy. These questions work to understand the meani ng behind the lived experience and look at self efficacy in relationship to: changes after the course, why change was not created prior to the course, changes in instruction, changes in the role at the college, and possible future changes. Appendix H further show s the relationship between self e fficacy, Research Q uestion 1 and the interview questions for the second int erview.
51 Following Interviews The interviews were audio recorded and a reflective not e technique as discussed by Cre swell (2013) was utilized This t echnique, as shown in Appendix I documented descriptive notes about the setting of the interview, as w ell as reflective notes that document impressions, thoughts, and personal reflections of the interview. Foll owing the interviews, recordings were transcribed. These transcriptions were key during data analysis as they were used for the analysis steps discu ssed later in the data analysis section of this chapter Immediately following the interviews and transcription s a profile with reflections for each interviewee was c ompleted. Once all interviews were completed, field notes and transcriptions were revisit ed to identify common themes following the steps of analysis described later in the data analysis section of this chapter Rigor Prion and Adamson (2014) describe rigor as the criteria for trustworthiness of the data collection, anal ysis, and interpretatio n According to Trainor and Graue (2014), (p. 267). Qualitative research, however, is necessary to answer questions that include complex phenomenon that are dependent on t he understanding of their experiences, settings, and context (Trainor & Graue, 2014, p. 268). Thomas and Magilvy (2011 ) suggest th at rigor in qualitative research should (p. 151). According to Lincoln and Guba (1985), there are a series of steps that can be used throughout qualitative research to establish credibility and trustworthiness of a qualitative research study. They have
52 outlined a series of step s which include: credibility, confi rmability, dependability, and transferability. Credibility refers to the validity of the data with the proper interpretations as intended by the participants (Prion & Adamson, 2014). This research has ensured that the particular criterio n was met through the transcriptions and later by the themes being reviewed by the participants to ensure that an accura te portrayal of their stories was captured This process is also known as member checking. Cres well (2013) suggests using member checkin g as a validity strategy that work s to check the accuracy of the findings. It is important that participants review themes to check that they accurately reflect their experiences. This member checking process was included in this research. After the data was analyzed and common themes were identified a survey using the online Qualtrics survey software was created to send to each participant. Eight themes were identified and the survey asked the participants to rank the application of each of the themes to their personal experience from strongly agreeing that it related to their personal experience to strongly disagreeing that it related to their personal experience. In addition, each question included a comment box for the participant to provide addition al feedback on the theme. T his survey assisted the participant s in further reflection on the meaning and allowed them to add any missed understanding of the experiences. Confi rmability refers to the absence of rese archer bias (Prion & Adamson, 2014). Accor ding to Chan, Fung, and Chien (2013), b racketing is a methodological device of phenomenological inquiry that requires deliberately putting aside one's own belief about the phenomenon under investigation or what one already knows about the subject prior
53 to and throughout the phenomenological investigation Reflecting on the provided is an accurate representation of the participants required to ensure valid ity of the analysis. According to Tufford and Newman (2010), this process phenomenon that can affect the research process. A clear understanding of the is described under researcher subjectivity later in this chapter. This subjectivity has been analyzed and identified so that it can be set aside with a clear understanding that the phenomenon to be analyzed is only that of the experiences of the participa nts. Transfera bility is needed to understand what population s the data can be applied to (Prion & Adamson, 2014 ). It helps to understand which populations the research is meant to address. Transferability can be understood through a clear description of t he sample interviewed a positions at the college, which may provide understand ing on what population the data might be applicable to. Dependability is needed s Prion & Adamson, 2014, p. 108). D ependability will be ensured through clear descriptions of how the data was collected and analyzed. Ap pendices for field notes and transcriptions have been attached to further help the reader unders tand how the data was collected, while a clear description of the analysis process and researcher methods can ensure the making process is understood. R eflective journaling was used
54 throughout the data collection and analysis process. Reflective journaling can allow for a deeper analysis and reflective criticisms, and deliberations (Ruiz Lopez et al., 2015). This process allowed for a deeper decision making as well as providing a more in depth understanding of the experiences of the participants. Data Analysis This study explored shared experiences of faculty participating in a profession al development program and how they assign ed meaning and intrinsic motivation to their work. A qualitative phenomenological research design emerged as the natural design to analyze thi s phenomenon as it allowed for the experiences of the participants to be further understood According to Cres well (2013), qualitative research should be conducted when you are looking to explor e the problem and understand a phenomenon In addition, Cre swell (2013) recommends a phenomenological approach wh aning for several individuals o Transcendental Phenomenological Approach This study took on a n approach that examined the essence of the experience of changes, or thoughts of changes, of those participating in a professio nal development program. In this approach, two questions were examined: 1) What was their lived experience? And 2) In what context did they experience it? (Moerer Urdahl & Creswell, 2004). These two questions are separated from assumptions and judgments of the researcher through the bracketing process previously described in this chapter. This process enables
55 A systemic analysis procedure is critical to the transcendental approach as it This step phenomenological approach to analyze t he shared phenomenon of faculty participating in a professional development program. According to Shosha (2012 ), Col strategy of data analysis works to employ the transcendental phenomenological approach of eliciting an exhaustive description about the phenomenon to reach true meanings. According to Edward and Welch (2011), this is a modification of (1970) empirically b ased phenomenological procedure that includes a vali dation process process of phenomenological Th e seven step proces s was completed as outlined in Table 3 2 Table 3 2. Step Description 1. Trans cription Transcribe participant interviews. 2. Extraction Significant statements are extracted. 3. Formulated Meanings Meanings are formulated 4. Aggregate Meanings The formulated meanings should be sorted themes. 5. Description Exhaustive description of the p henomenon is created. 6. Identify Structure The fundamental structure of the phenomenon should be described. 7. Validation Participants review the descriptive results of their experiences. Note. Adapted from Shosha, G. A. (2012). Employment of Colaizzi's strategy in descriptive phenomenology: a reflection of a researcher. European Scientific Journal 8(27), 31+.
56 Analysis Steps Step o ne During th e first step, transcriptions were created from the re corde d interviews. I made the decision to complete the tra nscriptions myself. This proved to be a very valuable decision and assisted me in immersing myself into the interviews and the experiences of my participants I used Dragon Naturally Speaking software to transcribe the interviews through audio transcriptio n into the software. Following this, I listened to the audio of the interview while reading through the transcript, pausing the audio when needed, to ensure that the transcription was accurate. This allowed me to experience every interview three times duri ng the first step of analysis. This allowed for the transcriptions to be read and re read, which was necessary to allow the information to be understood (S h osha, 2012). Step t wo Following the transcriptions significant statements were extracted from the transcriptions and given equal weight, without regard to statements that were repetitive or overlapping. For this step, I went through each transcript and highlighted all significant statements. Statements were considered significant when they fell into o ne of three categories. The first included statements of the experience being researched the experience of changes throughout or follow ing participation in the student guidance system certification In addition to the experience of changes during or foll owing completion of the program, statements regarding motivation to take the course were extracted to understand the various motivations for change among participants prior to taking the program. Lastly, statements about what made the changes possible were extracted in order to identify motivating factors. Step t hree. After all the interviews were reviewed and the statements of the experience have been identified, repetitive statements (from a single interview) were
57 removed and meanings were identified. Thi s step included two procedures. I first went through each interview and reviewed the highlighted statements. I made notes on each highlighted statement about the meaning. This meaning was identified in two ways. First, each statement was reviewed to determ ine which of the three categories in S tep 2 the statement fell into Then using s ocial cognitive theory and s ymbolic interactionism a meaning was identified. Using s ocial cognitive theory if a statement pertained to their beliefs about their own capabil ities it was identified as an experience in self identity or self efficacy. All other experiences could be identified as one of the five central focuses of Symbolic interactionism : the human as a social person, a thinking person, a person defining their o wn environment, a person affected by their current environment or active beings in their environment In some cases, these identified meaning s overlapped. Figure 3 1 and 3 2 illustrate how the tran script was highlighted in S tep 2 and the meaning identifie d in S tep 3 Figure 3 1 Transcript sample from second interview with Howard after completion of Step 2 and 3
58 Figure 3 2 Transcript sample from first interview with Shana after completion of Step 2 and 3 Once the initial identification of the mean ing of each experience was created, the online software Padlet was used to write each of these meanings on an online Post it not e along with the exact transcription text, and page/line numbers. Step four Once meanings for each participant were formulate d and created in Padlet the themes of the meanin gs found across participants were identified. In this stage Padlet was used to group the experiences to help fin d common meanings. Figure 3 3 shows how P adlet was used to organize the individual meanings in to grouped themes.
59 Figure 3 3 Padlet sample screenshot for grouped meanings in Step 4 S tep five Reviewing the themes that emerge d and analyzing how many participants shared the experience allowed for an exhaustive description of the phenomenon to be c reated. Step six After reviewing the extensive descriptions of the phenomenon, the fundamental structure of the phenomenon could be identified. Step seven To ensure validation of the identified themes and overall stru cture, Qualtrics an online survey t ool, was utilized. This survey as seen in Appendix J, included each theme that was identified as crossing over multiple stories. For this
60 survey the participant could identify on a Likert scale how they felt each theme applied to their own personal exper ience and to give any additional comments in a comment section This helped in understanding how each theme was experienced across participants. Of the seven participants, six completed the survey with both their Likert scale results, as well as additional comments on the proposed themes. Researcher Subjectivity According to Bevan (2014) cited Colaizzi (1978) provided some indication of application of phenomenological theory by stressing the importance of uncovering and interrogating presupposit ow n experience of the phenomenon. According to Schmin (1981) in Krefting (1990), qualitative research is a study of researcher to be free from bias when collecting and analyzing data. For this to occur, the researcher must first understand their own positionality and possible bias for the re search involved. According to Bodner and Orgill (2007), the role the researcher plays studies is to describe a universal essence of a phenomenon, it is important that the As a faculty member at Citrus Grove Community College I have had over five years of experience taking faculty development courses at the institution. While I have not comple ted the professional development program analyzed, I was part of facilitating to face meetings. My time taking professional development courses at Citrus Grove Community College led to a myriad of changes in both my
61 curriculum, my perception of my courses, my pedagogy, and my own self efficacy. T hese changes have created a strong interest in researching how professional development courses affect other faculty members. I began taking courses as an adjunct faculty member. Previousl y, I had worked in advertising and while I had a lot of content area knowledge, I was not familiar with current teaching practices or resources. My participation in faculty d evelopment opportunities has le d to my increased understanding of the available r esources that are offered by my college and elsewhere to increase my effectiveness as an instructor. My completion of a digital certification at my institution has drastically altered how I structure and implement my online courses and the technological re sources that I use for both online and face to face courses. In addition, the sharing of ideas in these courses with other faculty members, many of whom are within my own discipline, have led to an incr eased collaboration and communication among the facult y members I work with. Most importantly, my own experience in faculty development courses is what has led to my own infusion of real world activities that I believe has made my course more meaningful for my class. I have infused discussions about current e vents as well as applied course skills to real world situations. This has led to a positive response from students letting me know how important the class was for them, which in turn led to my own motivation for constant improvement. As a now tenured facul ty member, I still participate in faculty development programs and I have found that to be a constant source of inspiration for my practice. As I began this research, I look ed forward to working with other faculty to learn about
62 their experiences while tak ing professional development courses and discovering some of the shared experiences and common themes
63 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS This chapter will address the data collected in several ways. First, we walk ng of their background and connection at the college, their relationship with the researcher, and finally their experiences as shared through each of the two interviews. Following the participant s tories and the participant review of themes with feedback themes that crossed stories are shared. Seven final themes were identified using p henomenolo gical r esearch a nalysis approach. For each participant, there are three points of communication that occurred as part of the data collection: the first and second interview, as well as the feedback survey that was received. A timeline of th is communication is provided in Table 4 1 Table 4 1. Timeline of Participant Communication Name First Interview Date Second Interview Survey Completion Shana June 1, 2017 June 15, 2017 July 25, 2017 Howard June 8, 2017 June 15, 2017 July 25, 2017 Jerrica May 25. 2017 June 8. 2017 August 7, 2017 Carmen June 5, 2017 June 15, 2017 July 25, 2017 Kimber June 6, 2017 June 30, 2017 Not Completed Susan June 6, 20 17 June 13, 2017 August 7, 2017 Raja June 1, 2017 June 7, 2017 July 25, 2017 Participant Stories Jerrica While Jerrica had moved to a grant management position on the Rue campus by the time of our interview, she was teaching as an adjunct instructor of Introduction to Humanities, as well as H umanities of the Enlightenment and Romantic Period during
64 the time of her certification program. During this time, Jerrica taught the maximum number of allowable classes during the day at my home campus Pomelo She moved to Pomelo from the other small regional campus in the five campus cluster Agrume Havin g taught on two of the campuses and having a staff position on a third campus, she was able to provide a cross campus view to her experience. Jerrica was an adju nct who was heavily involved on the campus whenever possible and applied and interviewed for several positions prior to becoming a grant manager. Jerrica had completed over 300 hours of professional development courses at the time of our interview and had also completed several other certifications including one that focuses on adjuncts a nd another with an online learning focus My first interview with Jerrica was also the first that I would conduct towards my research. This was a great experience due to a friendship that I had developed with Jerrica over previous years working together at the college. While Jerrica was currently serving in a grant management position at the college on a different campus, Rue, she had previously served on my campus as an a djunct instructor of humanities. We have know n each other for a little over five years and had become good friends who even taught our courses together in a program at the college where two instructors of different courses link their courses and teach a co hort of students integrating the material from the courses together and teaching side by side. office where I was conducting the interview on her lunch break between mee tings. While the setting was formal, our prior relationship led to a very relaxed meeting Jerrica appeared very comfortable and eager to share her experiences. During this interview,
65 Jerrica stressed how the program helped her examine the way she teaches and how she feels about the material. In addition, she shared her main project that was created for the program and her willingness to share this work with others. Jerrica was part of a small cohort of around six who completed the program in April, 2013. T his was also the first cohort for the program. She explained that the cohort included those from various disciplines and campuses. Jerrica chose to take the program because she reviewed the program information and felt it would assist her in helping her st udents. Originally, she thought of the program as a tool for students, but found that she could use it in the classroom She explained that it helped her relate it to the material she was teaching in her course. Jerrica discussed a strong connection to the relationships that occurred during the program and expressed that throughout the classes it really felt that the participants She added ions that we were having online and in the classroom were based off of our own June 28, 2017). For Jerrica, the online forums were an additional sharing space. She discusse d how it was easy for her and other cohort members to express themselves in the online forums and how this provided for lengthy conversations. Jerrica stressed the importance of sharing ideas in both the face to face course, and online and how this impacte d her We were able to incorporate all of that feedback and yeah other people's ideas ended up in my project and I'm happy about that
66 because my ideas ended up in theirs 2017). Jerrica was able to gain ideas about how to implement new instruction techniques. Her lectures turned into rich discussions and she learned how to phrase statements into questions that would lead to deeper critical thinking from the student and al low them to bring their own personal experiences into the discussion. For the capstone project for the program, each participant was required to implement an action research project in their class Jerrica utilized these techniques and had students thinkin g about their world views at the beginning of the class and then reflecting at the end on how the course helped shape these worldviews. Additionally, during the first interview, Jerrica discussed a change in focus on grading, and how she viewed what materi al to cover in a course. She shared that it looking for reasons to deduct points to seeing where this student actually is with their work This led to looking at the overall pictur e of the students understanding instead of through every single word and make corrections and take points off personal communication, June 28, 2017). Finally, the interview ended with Jerrica discussing how she and her colleagues in th e program had discussions on the need for students to understand the material instead of just getting through the material. This led her from covering the entire book in an Introduction to Humanities course to focusing on only four chapters and making sure the students really understood the material before moving on to new material.
67 My second interview with Jerrica was also during her lunch break in her office, but was even more relaxed than the first. Her 12 year old daughter, whom I had met on several oc casions prior, was there with her doing some data inputting for her. We had a very friendly conversation before and after our official interview. The second interview was more of a reflection on the ideas discussed in the first and delving into the meaning behind the experiences. We started the questions by reflecting on what made the changes possible. Jerrica believed that the program really provided an opportunity for her to consider changes. The time and intentionality led her to ideas for her class that she previously had not thought of. It also made her realize the value of providing time made me make the time to make those changes in the class, to create an environment where the student could h ave thos e Another important aspect of the second interview was the focus on the lasting effects of the program and how it affected her relationships outside of the program. She explained she would talk a lot about what she had learned in the program with her colleagues and how it changed her confidence enabling her to have informed conversations with colleagues and also being able to answer their questions. She said, I know that it made me, going through the classes and getting the certification, made me feel like I knew a little bit more about why we were all here. And maybe turned me from someone who was only asking questio personal communication, J uly 8, 2017). Working with Jerrica prior to conducting the other interviews was a great learning experience because Jerrica had completed her dissertation, which was qualitative and
68 included faculty interviews, just two semesters prior. Jerrica had a very honest and up front, at times blunt, personality. I knew that she would guide me if she felt that the interview could be improved for the better. I mentioned to her that my interview with her was so relaxed that I was concerned about whether the other inte rviews would feel more formal and therefore the participants might be less forthcoming with information. She assured me that my two part interview process would assist in improving that atmosphere of comfort and sharing and that proved to be correct. Shan a Shana has been an instructor at the college for 10 years and is currently a full time tenured professor in reading. Her focus is on developmental reading and she is also in her last year of receiving her doctoral degree in h ig her education a dministratio n. s for online learning and works in a faculty leadership role that help s fellow faculty enhance their teaching and learning. While she works on the large Clementine campus, she lives closer to the smaller Pomelo campus and frequently utilizes the faculty resources on that campus. Shana completed the program in July 2013 when she was still a tenure track professor. Likely due to our prior friendship, the first interview was very relaxe d. Shana offered to meet in my office on the Pomelo campus. She was motivated to take the course due to what was a very personal experience for her. She was struggling with juggling life and school and had an instructor who really worked to help her succe ed and guided her in both her personal life and courses. She wanted to do the same for her I wanted to help them succeed and help them to be
69 motivated in their college career as well. And not only in their college career, in thei r perso Shana expressed the value of the relationships during her cohort. While she had a fairly large cohort of 20, they would frequently break into smaller groups to share ideas. She expressed that much of the conversat ion was social and they developed friendships. While Shana remembers that there were conversations and work done online, it was the face to face communication that really resonated and shaped her capstone project for the course. She s aid she no longer uses the full project she created, which worked to infuse college success skills, in her course. This change came about due to some time constraints, but an intentional focus on embedding parts of the program is still done in an informal I am more intentional. Before it was just like spur of the moment N ow it is more like I need to make sure I have these things in place (Shana, personal communication, June 1, 2017). Shana was also able to share with her mentees ou tside the cohort the things she has learned. As she explained: Since I was a mentor still working with some of my mentees I would share with them different ways of collecting feedback from students. One in particular is using the Qualtrics survey One pe rson who I worked with started implementing it and was really shocked by it. It really helped her to quickly collec t feedback from her students (Shana, personal communication, June 1, 2017). use to help her mentees and this was embed ded into their course as well. She remembers them sharing that it was very helpful information. Our second interview atmosphere mimicked that of the first. Shana was supposed to meet with me at noon, but called to see if we could meet earlier and I was
70 available to do so. During this meeting, Shana appeared to remember a lot more about her experiences and the project that she implemented and its successes in her course. When discussing what really made the changes poss ible for her, she immediately (Shana, personal communication, June 15, 2017). These resources included literature as well as the relationships and conversations she ha d with her colleagues in before I was just going with the flow and I hadn't really thought about what my students really needed. It gave me a better perspective when I started taking the program by (Shana, personal communication, June 15, 2017). Shana noticed that her students were able to see that she cared by the changes she made in the course and this helped in a very informal w ay to impact her instruction. While she does not fully implement the project in her course now, she said she is consistently more intentional about identifying the needs of her students and how she can tweak her instruction to address their needs. She also consistently works to share these ideas with others and explained: I'm just hoping that I can reach out to other professors ongoingly because there are still some people that are just in the mindset that whatever you do students are not going to change a nd you are just wasting your time. Or they don't think that the program we have are not really needed. But it (Shana, personal communication, June 15, 2017). I could tell after both interviews with Shana that this work was very per sonal to her and she really wanted to help her students overcome obstacles in a way that she was able to do thanks to the guidance she had in college. She stressed the importance of being a life long learner and I could tell this was not only a core value for her as a
71 person and instructor, but also as a colleague and that she really wanted to share this information with her mentees and other colleagues. Raja At the time that Raja completed the program, she was a math tutor as well as an instructor teac hing developmental math. She has been with the college for over 12 years and came to the regional Pomelo campus from the main Rue campus. She had also previously taught student success courses, worked as a career advisor, and was involved in a variety of w ays on both campuses. She completed three of the college s six certification programs prior to our interviews and was in the middle of completing her fourth. Because of the changes in requirements that would not allow some staff positions to teach classes as well, Raja was not teaching any classes at the time of our interview, but worked directly with students in the tutoring center and looked forward to teaching again if the college changed requirements. Raja and I have known each other as colleagues for a few years while crossing paths on the same campus. We exchanged small talk in the break rooms and frequently d iscuss ed what we were doing in our classes and departments. We tended to have differing schedules and therefore did not have lengthy discussions or spend time together outside of work. Raja is a very friendly person who loves sharing things she has learned at the college. For our first interview, we met in my office, which is right across from the breakroom and Raja brought her lunch in. We chose m y office instead of the breakroom so we would have a quiet atmosphere for the recording. Raja is a very expressive person who was filled with laughter throughout the interview. She also had a lot of non verbal gestures to help illustrate everything she sai d Raja chose to take the program
72 because she wanted to do some experimental research in the classroom to see how student learning could be improved. In addition, she was somewhat familiar with the guidance system as it was presented to students, but knew that it had undergone some major revisions and improvements and wanted to see how it was currently being implemented and how instructors could incorporate it into the classroom. Raja was a part of a cohort of around 20 from various disciplines and departme nts including some from student services, librarians, and full and part time faculty. The larger group would break out into smaller groups to share ideas and then come back to the larger group to share together. She also remembered that much of the progra m was online, including the discussions, with some face to face meetings to present ideas. Raja did describe a learning curve with the online discussions and it took time for all the members to work through the deadlines, netiquette issues, and leaving mea ningful feedback for other cohort members. omething I wanted to do which I didn't was create a panel of experts that personal communic ation, June 1, 2017). Raja felt the program was great in helping her reach her non traditional and developmental students who had different challenges and struggles than her traditional dy that would (Raja, personal communication, June 1, 2017). She was excited to share the results of her project, which had students complete a project researching the career they wanted to go into and learn more about whether the career would reall y be a good
73 fit for them. She found that the project helped students understand their own career paths more and that this affected their own self efficacy. During our second interview Raja shared the importance that technology had in allowing her to compl ete her project, as well as the time and space to think about her project and receive input from others. She explained how this had an effect on her own self efficacy and changed her willingness to assist students when non material related questions come u p in class about something that the guidance system could assist or just show and tell something, you need to feel comfortable getting to it quickly (Raja, person al communication, June 7, 2017). In addition, this self efficacy led Raja to feel more comfortable making changes to the course to meet student needs. She described how she would the students need once For Raja, sharing her ideas was of great importance and she would share what she learned with everyone. This was a direct impact of taking the course speak more now post training tha n I did before, about the need to really dig into what (Raja, personal communication, June 7, 2017). Finally, Raja shared that she has changed how she focuses her time in class I really don't have a problem with spen ding less time on personal communication, June 7, 2017). Reflecting on the interviews with Raja, I could see how her career advising position really led to her desire to use the guidance system to help students understand t heir career paths more and how to make the right decisions to get there. In addition,
74 discussions and relationships were very important for Raja and she consistently mention ed how she would t alk to everyone, instructors and non instructors She also discus sed what she was doing in the classroom and how it was working. In addition, this carried over into her personal life She wanted to help people outside of the college further understand their career paths. Susan Susan started working at the college just three years earlier teaching dual enrollment student success courses at a high school adjacent to the Pomelo campus. She was the point person for the dual enrollment program at the college and was the newest of all my participants to instruction. She cited this as a reason for her to complete the program. She taught a course that was very career oriented to students who had not yet fully developed their career paths and was new to understanding how to reach students. She knew that the student guidance syste m was an important value of the college and she wanted to learn about how to infuse the system and the value into her course and make sure she was utilizing all the resources available. Susan now works at the Clementine campus as a career program a dvisor. Prior to becoming a tenured professor of communication, I taught student success and speech at the same high school as Susan. We taught across the hall from each other and would frequently help each other out when needed in the classroom and while handling concerns at the high school. We had not spoken in some time since she had moved to the Clementine campus. The beginning of our first interview involved catching up on life and career since the last time we had spoken, maybe a year earlier. We met at her o ffice on the Clementine campus This was my first time visiting her there. We had a very friendly
75 conversation and then went into the interview questions. Susan was in an extremely small cohort with just a handful of individuals. They even met at a coffee shop instead of at the college for a couple of meetings. This led to valuable discussions and relationships forming throughout her experience in the program. Susan discussed how e (Susan, personal communication, June 6, 2017 ). Susan and her small cohort were able to explore their projects in detail and were never strapped for time. This might be one of the reasons that Susan didn't really remember any of the online components of the program. Susan considered the intimate meetings to be at the core of the program experience that she had I remember just absorbing ideas about how other instructors thought about their students and thought about how to reach th em in ways that I woul project Susan wanted the student s to explore their career paths throughout the course and reflect on how they changed. While this led many of the high school students to become less certai n about their career paths, Susan felt this was a success because it enabled them to think more critically about their career paths and the decisions they made toward their goals. During our second interview, Susan reflected on what made the changes possib expressed that she never would have tried an experiment in her course without the enc ouragement of the program and the time and space to think about the project.
76 For Susan, one of the critical aspects of working within the small groups was meeting those with varying skills. Susan had not taken statistics courses, even in her m ram, and relied on one of the cohort instructors to assist her in understanding the data from her project. This also helped her to understand the value of statistics and changed how she viewed other aspects of her job regarding the data. She described this effect. I see in my work here that I have changed in that sometimes I want to see what are the numbers and what can we generate to prove that what I am doing is powerful and is worth the inve (Susan, personal communication, June 13, 2017). Finally, Susan reflected on how she viewed the use of her colleagues as a resource and how she was a resource for her colleagues. She believed the program helped her to break down some barriers that kept her from seeking help from othe rs. She always had people offer up their help, but now understood that the culture of the that they c ould help you, but that they w ould actually help you. ture and the 2017). While Susan is no longer teaching courses in her new role and is not sure if she will go back into the classroom, she valued how her experience changed her outlook and her role at the college and the resources she could use in her current position to help meet the needs of her students. She was very open in sharing about her experience and how it changed from her instruction to her advising role. She wa s very thankful for the experience and the instructors and cohort members who took the time to
77 work with her and help her understand how to implement her project and also how to evaluate it. Kimber While Kimber is currently teaching in a full time facult y role at the college that consists of teaching new student experience courses as well as advising, she previously worked as an instructor teaching speech and student success at the time of taking the program. She works at the Rue c ampus and has been with the college for 11 years. She middle of her fourth at the time of the interviews and had completed various other faculty developm ent courses. She completed her d octoral degree in May and was eager to help another doctoral student in any way possible. I did not actually realize that I knew the faculty member at first until we started communicating by email I then realized we had some prior limited interaction based on Ki mber's previous experience teaching speech and our communication during various college wide speech department meetings. We met for our first interview in her office on the Rue campus. She was excited to share her experiences and was very friendly and enga ging. I could tell th at she was very busy and there were a couple interruptions that we paused the interview for while I was there. Kimber was motivated to take the course because she was teaching student success and speech and was looking for ways of infu sing some of the college success skills from her student success course into her speech course. Her cohort included around eight participants. Kimber had a variety of disciplines within her cohort that she felt provided a profound impact on her experience. I like that bonding and that sharing because now there's something I can take that maybe a
78 math professor use s that I can align into both my new student experience course and n, June 6, 2017). Kimber recalled that there was a lot of communication online as well as face to face. She reflected on how she shared about note taking and time management with others in the course M any from other disciplines were excited to learn ho w they could take what was being taught in the student success course and infuse it into their courses to further help students be successful. She said that many of the participants realized that as faculty there somehow, (Kimber, personal communication, June 6, 2017). Our second interview was delayed twice due to Kimber first having a scheduling conflict and then becoming ill. While all the other intervi ews took place one to two weeks apart, the second interview for Kimber was three weeks following the first and was also the last interview that I conducted for my research. I did not notice an y impact from this on the conversations we had. Kimber was able to reflect on how she had embedded advising into her speech course She also explained how completing all the training for the program and taking the time to work on the project allowed her to be able to make those changes. Kimber also noticed how the cour se helped her students understand that she had knowledge that might assist them beyond the speech course material I think these changes impacted my instruction by having the students know that I am knowledgeable in more than just my course and having the m be more comfortable with me in understanding the course communication, June 30, 2017).
79 Kimber expressed how taking the program also impacted her conversations with colleagues as we ll as conversations that occurred within her committee work. Kimber was very friendly and excited to share her experiences during both interviews. She was very confident about advising going into the program because of her experiences teaching student succ ess, but she still gained a lot from being in the program T hese experiences led to changes in her speech course as well as in conversations with colleagues and the way students communicated with her. Carmen While Carmen had previously worked as a tenure d professor of math, she was working as a tenured professor and interim dean at the time she took the program By the time of our interviews, she had bec o me the dean of architecture, engineering, & t echnology, while holding her tenure d position. She still taught a couple of courses every semester as well. She had been at the college for 18 years and worked on a variety of projects at the college. Carmen had previously completed two of the six professional development programs as well as numerous other cours es. I had not actually met Carmen prior to our interviews, but she was well known for being a rock star at the college and being involved in a lot of work and having a voice on a lot of committees. She was the kind of person that colleagues went to with q uestions. It was odd that our paths had not crossed because her husband was a mentor to me. Her husband, Rio, was working on the same campus, Pomelo when I first started working there. I frequently went to him for assistance in navigating college issues o r policies. Carmen works on a different campus, Clementine, and we had not had a chance to meet.
80 While Carmen worked almost forty minutes away at the Clementine campus, she lived closer to Pomelo and asked to meet in my office. She was incredibly friendly and I could tell right away that she would be very comfortable sharing all her experiences. During our first interview, I learned a lot about Carmen and the courses she teaches. She previously worked in so ftware development and holds a d octoral degree in math. She was the only participant interviewed that was considered a part of the AS faculty as opposed to general education faculty She really felt that taking the program was mediately (Carmen, personal communication, June 5, 2017). In addition, Carmen (Carmen, personal commu nication, June 5, 2017). Carmen was in one of the earliest cohorts of the program and had about 20 colleagues in the cohort, but she stressed that they mostly worked within smaller groups. She noted that the cohort was hel d on her campus, Clementine, but s ome of the participants of the cohort were from other campuses. She also remembered that it (Carmen, personal communication, June 5, 2017). She specifically noted that the f aculty in the cohort who were teaching student success courses could provide her with some innovative ideas for her work would hit me with questions that I could answer and that could be used to develo p June 5, 2017).
81 Carmen reflected mostly on the face to face interactions that took place. While she remembered that some components were online, the face to face interact ions provided the most value and even some telephone conversations she would have with a couple of cohort members. She added that she even kept in touch with a few of the or the program. The program helped Carmen students about the profession and being there to answer any questions This was helpful even if the questions were not directly tied to the material (Carmen, personal communication, June 5, 2017). In practical use for the students and could just focus on helping them see the co nnection to a few things in the course. This carried over into how Carmen utilized online discussions 7). During our second interview, when looking back on what made the changes possible, June 15, 2017 ). In addition to the time and space, Carmen really focused on the encouragement that the program provided and the way that simply having a program like this helped faculty see that this was a value of the college and something the college wanted faculty t o take the time to work on
82 communication, June 15, 2017). When Carmen considered how the experience affected her relationships an d conversations after the completion of the course, she reflected on them from two different angles. She continued to teach courses and worked with faculty as colleagues and shared teaching experiences and ideas But she also worked as a supervisor giving advice to those who communication, June 15, 2017). Carmen communicates consistently with her fellow faculty and those who report to her about the importance of the program and will often recommend the program to those she supervises when she discusses goals for them to work on over the next yea r. It was obvious to me that Carmen was a faculty member and a dean who believed the sharing of ideas among faculty is critical to the success of students as is understanding new strategies that can be infused into any course. She was very forthcoming wi th information and wanted to share more She even offered to send me more materials about the program and her project following the interview. She valued the time and space for sharing ideas with faculty. Howard Howard was working as a developmental math instructor as well as a math coordinator at the time he took the program. After the college changed their requirements for staff being able to teach, he became a senior lab supervisor for the math department on the Rue campus and was no longer instructing. He would like to go
83 back to instructing if the opportunity allows. Howard has worked for the college for eight years and has completed three of the six programs at the college as well as over 125 hours of professional development courses. Howard is the o nly participant that I had never crossed paths with while working at the college and had not had any connection to or interaction with. I met Howard in a conference room that I had reserved on the Rue campus. While the conference room was large and I was worried the atmosphere might feel a little formal for sharing experiences, Howard and I quickly got to know each other during the first interview He was very forthcoming with information and was eager to share how the experience affected him. He was encou raged to take the program by his dean because of how it directly applied to his position as a math coordinator. His small cohort started with six individuals, but dropped to four due to two dropping out for personal reasons. He expressed that he quickly be members of his cohort (Howard, personal communication, June 8, 2017). Much of the communication occurred through email and online for Howard and his cohort He expressed that this was not a problem at all and he felt comfortable reacting to the posts online. He did express the importance of the face to face meetings and stated that he had even recommended one of the previous programs he was in should meet face to face at times like this program did. He suggested that t hey meet more than just at the beginning and end, with meeting s in between. This would make the other program more similar in set up to the student guidance system certification The project that Howard implemented in his course was actually something he h ad tried previously when he taught at a high school. The program led him to think
84 about ways to change and adapt it for his college students. In addition, the program ex perience: I felt more comfortable giving advice to other students about what was going on w hat they were doing and everything else. I wasn't reluctant to give advice. B efore I took the program, I would tell them Y ou have to see your advisor about that, which is a scapegoat approach. But I felt better about it after because I was familiar, more familiar, with the things the college was doi ng to try and help students. P eople can ask me a question and I could say with a certain amount of confidence O kay this is what you have to do (Howard, personal communication, June 8, 2017). communication, June 16, 201 7). The program was instrumental in helping Howard know answers to assist students, and more importantly, know where to look to access resources to assist students. Howard expressed that this has had an effect on his current role including significant int eraction with students outside the classroom communication, June 16, 2017). He even expressed how this has affected communication with family members who are in college. Howard was eager to help his students and this was reflected in his interviews. I could tell, by his own admission, that he was previously very nervous talking to students and felt timid about having a level of responsibility when giving advice. The prog ram was a huge turning point that led to a complete shift in confidence in the ability to advise others. Howard has carried this over to his current position in assisting students in the math lab.
85 Summary The profiles for the participants help ed to unders tand the background of each participant as well as their connection to the researcher and how this affected the communication or interview process. Each profile walked through the first and second interview and the experiences of each participant and the m eaning they gave to those experiences. These participants represent ed a cross section of disciplines and campuses and experiences, but there were some common insights that could be extracted from these experiences to better understand the impact of taking the student guidance system certification at Citrus Grove Community College. The rest of this chapter will focus on themes that were identified through the analysis process. Themes Themes were identified following gical Resear ch Analysis. During Step 4 of this approach, the meaning s that have been identified for each extractable significant phrase are aggregated across participants to see which meanings appear to be represented multiple times throughout the interviews and acros s participants. Eight themes were identified and sent in a survey with a feedback request to the participants to further ensure that the themes were accurately represented. The results supported the original themes sent, with all participants agreeing with seven of the eight themes and five of the six responders agreeing with the eighth theme. Two of the themes, change in curriculum d esign and change in curriculum d elivery were found to tie in together and were combined into one theme, change in c urriculu m design and d elivery. Table 4 2 shows a brief description of the final seven theme s that were identified.
86 Table 4 2. Themes I dentified Theme Description 1. Motivation for Course Participation Motivation was based on desire to make a connection between the material and the goals. 2. Time and Space The program was critical in providing time and space to think about and cultivate ideas. 3. Small Groups for Rich Discussions Small groups in the program were critical to foster the rich discussions and relationships that led to the development of ideas. 4. Communication Change Participants had rich discussions and shared ideas more frequently with colleagues after completing the program 5. Change in Curriculum Focus T he program changed how participants think about their material and have led to having greater depth and less breadth of material. 6. Change in Curriculum Design and Delivery The program changed the way that participants design and deliver material to their students. 7. Change in Self Efficacy Program helped participants understand how to help students, which led to increased confidence in answering student questions. Motivation for Course Participation During the first interview, one of the initial questi ons asked of participants was why they were taking the professional development program. While answers varied, all participants had a motivation that was based on their need to learn more about their students and/or how to connect the work they were doing in their courses to their students. This included the need to learn more about the resources available to their
87 students, and an understanding about how the participant s could use this to help their students. Susan stated the resources that the college had to offer and she wanted to learn more about what resources were available and communication, August 7, 2017). Howard was a math coordinator for developmental classes and thought that his role the p rogram and help him to understand the resources available in counseling his students an d how the college is using resources (Howard, personal commu nication, June 8, 2017). In addition, he wanted (Howard, personal communication, July 25 2017). Jerrica wanted to make sure she was using all available resources to help students. She looked at the curriculum wanted to help her students, but there was a much more personal connection that she wanted to make. She described how she prev iously had an instructor who connected with her on a personal level and helped guide her when she was in school while also starting a family. She described this experience and how it affected her motivation as an instructor: I really struggled in terms of my classes and she really guided me along the way in several different ways. I wanted to help my students succeed and help them to be motivated in their college career. And not only in their college career, but in their personal lives. (Shana, personal com munication, June 1, 2017). While Carmen had been at the institution for quite some time and knew about all the resources available, she really felt that as an AS faculty member, whose primary
88 goal was to make sure curriculum was related directly to the wor kplace students are being prepared for, she would need to take the program to help her develop ideas to implement that connection in the classroom. Kimber was also very familiar with the resources, as she was already applying the program to her student suc cess course, but she was interested in learning how to incorporate it into her speech course Understanding the motivation for participants to take the course could help understand the second question of this research which sought to discover how participants describe d their own changes in intrinsic motivation. This theme helps to indicate that participants were intrinsically motivated prior to complet ion of the course. In addition, it is important to understand how intrinsic motivation was a factor in signing up for the course as this may illustrate the type of participant that takes part in the process. According to DePasque and Tricomi (2015), a critical component to learning is intrinsic motivation. With participants starting the course wit h intrinsic motivation, they may be more likely from the beginning of the course to have increased understanding of the material and desire to make changes. Time and Space Throughout both interviews with each individual, there was a constant reference to how the program provided the time and space needed to assist the participants in making changes. Whether they were changes that had already been considered, ideas that were developing but not fully fleshed out, or ideas that came during the program, partic ipants found it necessary to take the time to cultivate ideas and think them through in order to create the changes made. Susan summed up what made the changes to her class possible during her second interview: So, when yo u have yourself that
89 opportunity to really sit down and reflect of course things are going to be better, Later in this interview she went on to say that it was valuable for in the classroom ( Susan, personal communication, June 13, 2017). While Raja and Jerrica both found that the program helped them in making changes by giving them the time and space to think about and implement those changes. Raja has spent several ( Susan, personal time to and that she felt that this focus reflected a value of the college as evidenced by them providing a program that gives faculty and staff the time and space to focus on the cultivation and implementation of their ideas. It is im portant to understand the conditions under which the faculty members could work in order to understand how this may have affected their ability to experience changes in self efficacy and intrinsic motivation, which the research questions are designed to un derstand. The faculty found that without having time and space to cultivate their thoughts and communicate with fellow faculty, they would not have been able to experience the program and the changes they made in a meaningful way. Small Groups for Rich Dis cussions While the time and space to think about ideas was necessary, it was what happened during those group meetings that was critical to helping the ideas evolve. All seven participants found that having small group discussions allowed for reciprocal gr oup feedback that led to innovative ideas or the evolution of previous thoughts. It was found that these groups were small, heterogeneous, and fostered rich discussions.
90 The actual size of the overall cohorts varied from three to 20. When a group consisted of more than around six individuals, small groups of around 6 were created. Carmen, Shana, and Raja discussed how they had larger groups of around 20, but the groups were consistently encouraged to break into smaller groups for the majority of the sharing of ideas and discussions. Jerrica and Kimber both had medium sized cohorts of around six to eight. Howard and Susan both had small groups of less than 5. Regardless of the actual cohort size, the discussions and the sharing of ideas occurred in small grou ps. It was found that throughout all the cohorts regardless of which campus the program was being held on, these groups were heterogeneous in campus and in position/discipline and that this aspect was important to how ideas were developed. Raja found that there were individuals in her program from all over the college and in different areas including : librarians, part time faculty, full time faculty, and student advisors with various knowledge in admissions, financial aid, and other areas. Kimber found tha t they were from across the college and from various disciplines including math and science which was very different from her discipline in student success and speech. She found this to be helpful because maybe a m ath professor uses that I can align into both my new student experience Raja, personal communication, June 6, 2017). Carmen, a math faculty member and dean, found that it was great to work with someone who taught student succe ss courses. She continues to keep in touch with this faculty member and believe s they probably would not have forged this relationship without the program. She described this experience as:
91 Some of the folks who were in my cohort were New Student Experienc e ( NSE ) faculty and they were able to give me some really good ideas of what I could do to almost to hit me with questions that I could answer that we could develop together ideas for what I could add to my course. So that was really beneficial to be with other people from a wide variety of disciplines. It was a really interesting opportunity to connect with people in different disciplines. I don't know that our paths would've ever crossed (Carmen, personal communication, June 5, 2017). The small groups wi th individuals from all over the college led to fruitful discussions. Jerrica found that having a variety of individuals affected the the discussions were based off our own experiences, but also difference in experience helped to strengthen the discussions (Jerrica, personal communication, May 25, 2017). In addition, Jerrica shared how the cohort members would feed off y to say that the ideas of others ended up in her final project for the program and she was sure that some of her ideas showed up in their projects as well. Susan said that she was inspired because i t is always great to be surrounded by creative and thoug htful colleagues ( Susan, personal communication, August 7, 2017). Susan also remembered how other instructors thought about their students and thought about how to reach them teachers talk about how they work through what they want to present to their students ( Susan, personal communication, June 6, 2017). While the discussion centered on the projects that each individual was working on for the p rogram, it was also found that the discussions allowed for development of friendships that led to more than just work on their projects. Several of the participants discussed the friendships that were created during the program and how these affected
92 their was able to forge a relationship with a couple of person she developed a friendship with in the program (Shana, personal communication, June 1, 2017). Howard suggested that the discussions were more than just what to do on the project and beca me friendly chats. This reciprocal feedback was critical d uring the face to face meetings. Most of the participants focused on the face to face meeting e nvironment, but a few recall ed how rich discussions were also available in the online environment Raja found that there were a lot of discussions online that helped her with some of her ideas. Jerrica also found quite a bit of the discussions online and f ound that because the cohort members were typically also instructors they understood how to give well developed feedback online. She also found that the online feedback you were able to have sort of that lengthier discussion some of t he back and forth, but also as ideas (Jerrica, May 25, 2017). Howard suggested that the reason the online communication worked in this program was because there were also face to face meetings that occurred at the beginning, end, and throughout the program This helped the members get to know each other before providing feedback online. Having small groups was found to be one of the most critical conditions for the partici develop their own ideas. These small discussions are what really enhanced the learning and led the participants to feel more confident in their communication. Without these rich discussions, they would not have been able to learn from each other in a way that
93 encouraged cross disciplinary collaboration. Fostering relationships with colleagues and learning about the work of their peers was also found to help faculty feel increased motivation in working on their own ideas and the changes they wanted to make in their course. This theme was one of the more repetitive throughout the interviews and impacted the understanding of both research questions by developing an understanding of t he most significant condition that led to a change in self efficacy and intrinsic motivation. Communication Change It was found that while participants had rich discussions and communication during their meetings, this communication extended both beyond th e cohort during their program and beyond the program once it had ended. During the program, several participants found themselves engaging in conversations about the program from colleagues who were not participating at that time. Jerrica discussed how she got a lot of questions from colleagues and spent a lot of time in the part time faculty offices at the Pomelo campus. She describes this experience by saying lot of the conversations that I had with other part time professors were about how to do thin gs or how are you time having these discussions at the Pomelo campus, but found herself in conversation over lunch in the breakroom and with visiting colleagues in their faculty offices to share with them what she has learned. Kimber also said that it impacted her conversations with others. The communication about the program did not end when the program ended. Almost all the participants described how they shared the info rmation following the completion of the program. Shana said that she had a desire to mentor others during
94 the program and became a mentor following the program. This le ad to her sharing ideas with them different ways of collecting feedback from students As she he started implementing it and was really shocked by it. And it really helped her to quickly collect feedback fr om her students (Shana, personal communication, June 1, 2017) She explained that this communication was ongoing and she was can reach ou t to other professors Raja also experienced an increase in communication after the program She believes that she speaks more now to colleagues post training than she did before communication, June 7, 2017). Raja added that she gave lots of advice to others and said they frequently told her that they might use it in their classroom. Finally, Carmen had a unique position, as both a faculty member and a dean, in which to share the information after the program was c Whether I am talking to faculty as a fellow faculty member and that still happens or I am talking to them as a d ean and supervisor, it is something that I am just hyperaware of now communication, June 15, 2017) W hen looking at how participants may have experienced a change in self efficacy, a look at the products of self efficacy may also be used to further understand this experience. Harrison, Rainer, Hochwarter, & Thompson (1997) found that individuals are self influenced to change behavior based on attitudes towards the work environment. Increased communication with participants and colleagues outside of the
95 program may be indicative of a change in perception of work environment as well as their ability to confi dently discuss instruction and curriculum with their colleagues. Change in Curriculum Focus The changes and an increase in communication among colleagues during the program was found to create several course changes for participants. One of the themes that was frequently brought up in the meetings was a change in how participants think about their material These changes have led to creating greater depth with sometimes less breadth of material. The participants often found that it was more important to f ocus on a limited amount of material and make sure the students had a really strong grasp of that material, rather than have them understand a little about a lot of material. Jerrica explained that she had a lot of conversations with her the difference between needing to get to chapter ten in the book and needing to get the students to understand c hapter eight (Jerrica, personal communication, May 25, 2015) problem now with spending communication, June 7 2017). In developing curriculum and making sure it connect ed with students, several to be made for everything that was delivered S ometimes the curriculum could be put aside to have conversations with students. Carmen explained that what she learned from talking to her fellow participants was that : you don't really have to make such a di re ct connection to the material That you can do things in class that really just kin d of put the material aside for a few a few minutes and say o I know all of you want to be computer scientists ; do you have any questions about the profession? (Carmen, personal communication, June 5, 2017).
96 education, and personal life, Susan also found value in putting some of the specific curriculum aside and having conversations with student s about their goals and creating more of a conversation. what I needed to deliver, and how I would explain to the students how they might see nal communication, August 7, 2017). Social cognitive theory helps in understanding how instructors make decisions on changes to curriculum and instruction. These changes can often be seen as a sign that increased self efficacy has occurred (Martin, 2004). The changes seen in how faculty members choose to focus on parts of the curriculum may be a result of increased self confidence in their own ability to reach students beyond the curriculum, choosing instead to have conversations that reach ed out to the st Change in Curriculum Design and Delivery It was not just the curriculum itself that was change d; the design and delivery of the curriculum was also found to be significantly impacted as a result of the program. The participants foun d that they were much more intentional in their design and delivery and took careful thought when planning their curriculum They determined how way to deliver this curr iculum. For Howard, it got him to think about better ways to reach his students and how he treated students from that point on. Shana tried to be more intentional in used to supplement the curriculum in her class. She s Before it was just like spur of the moment, but now it is more like I
97 need to make sure I have these things in place 1, 2017). This intentionality was evidenced in the changes that were created to the design of the course. Susan has always felt that student learning should be the focus when designing a course, but the program assisted her in the idea of adding a capsule before and after to her class where students would take time to understand their goals at the beginning of the semester and then revisit these goals and how they have evolved over the semester. Carmen said that she added discussions on the online learning management system for the course that were outside of the curriculum and more surrounding a di scussion of student career goals. Shana saw the value in adding peer support to the design of her curriculum. In addition due to the intentionality when designing the course and the resources that were used, several participants found themselves changing how they deliver ed the material. Shana found that her peer support aspect motivated her to create more group activities and projects to deliver the curriculum. Raja found that she was much more willing to tweak her courses after they started and make chan ges as they went along instead of waiting until the following semester. Finally, Jerrica changed quite a bit about ement May 25, 2017). In addition, Jerrica found that she changed the way she viewed assessments and had more formative assessments to lear n where a student was really at instead of constantly quizzing and grading students along the way. This helped her to
98 see whether the students really understood the material and to assist them in making the changes needed to make that understanding. Simila r to changes in curriculum, changes in the design and delivery of the curriculum also suggest ed an increase in self efficacy on the part of the participant. These changes show ed how the faculty member felt confident in making changes throughout their cours e and more easily adapt ed to the needs of the ir students. In addition, these changes were also seen as the result of self motivation, suggesting an increase in intrinsic motivation. Change in Self Efficacy The program led to an increased awareness of resou rces and how to use them. confidence when talking to students and that when you take the program it helps mfortable talking to reluctant to give advice prior to the program, but now feels familiar with the resources the college offers to help guide students. Raja found confidence in being able to quickly access and use the resources in class. aving access to laptops and all that is great, but when you want to walk students through either in a group or just show the class, you need to feel comfortable getting to it q uickly yourself (Raja, personal communication, June 7, 2017) and that this comfort came with taking the program In addition to understanding and using the resources the college provided the program also gave the participants an understanding of using ot her colleagues as resources. Susan recalled using a colleague as a resource during the program because
99 she had a limited understanding of statistics and wanted to use statistics to help understand the impact of the changes she made in her class on her stud ents. She answer questions and feels more confident doing so (Sus an personal communication, June 13 2017). Shana also saw an increased confidence as a result of using her reased confidence has led to sharing more with others about what she learned. The increased self efficacy as a result of the program led to inc reased comfort that I have b work with students in his staff position in the math depot. He People can ask have to do program. (Howard, personal communication, June 8. 2017). He further described how when you take the program whole differen June 16. 2017). In addition to the engagement with students, the faculty found that their confidence had led to the increased sharing with colleagues. Jerrica found that she (Jerrica, personal communication, June 8, 2017). Jerrica believes that this may even
100 have had an impact with her engagement at the college as it was around the time she started becoming more involved with initiatives at the college. Susan found that prior to colleagues at the college regarding offering or receiving help. The program led to her seeing how her colleagu es could be used as a resource and how she could be used as from her colleagues and that she better understands the resources at the college, she because One of the main focuses of this research and one of the two research questions, was to understand the changes in self efficacy among participants I t was found that the participants directly discussed their changes in self efficacy. This resulted in changes in self efficacy as a theme on its own. This theme directly supports that participation in this program directly resulted in increased se l f efficacy from the perception of the participant. This perception of increased ability to reach students and understand the resources available and how to use them can help explain the changes participants made in their curriculum and instruction and their confidence in doing so. Theme Connection The themes that have been identified in this research work together to create a structure that can help understand the experience of the participants. The participants w er e found to have three needs from the program: t hey were motivated by the need to understand resources provided by the college as wanting the ability t o help students they needed the time and space to think, and they needed small group discussions. The mot ivation of wanting to learn about available resources led to a greater understanding
101 of those resources and the confidence to use them. This confidence led to increased communication exchange with both colleagues and students. In addition, the confidence i n the resources led to changes in the curriculum, as well as the design and delivery of the course. This relationship and the overall structure of the experience is illustrated in figure 4 1 Figure 4 1 Participant Experience Structure: The Connection between Themes
102 Time and space to think and small group discussions have a reciprocal relationship where the small group discussions provide the time and space to think while purposely taking the time and space to think led to small group discussion. Takin g the time and space to think was critical in providing the small group discussions that were valuable in being more intentional when planning the course and taking the time to make changes to the design and delivery of the course. The motivation that part icipants had for taking the course led t o a change in self efficacy which affected the ability and motivation to make changes to the curriculum and communication with colleagues and students. This research looked to further understand the experiences of c hange in self efficacy and intrinsic motivation for the participants taking part in the program. At the heart of the experience for the participants, it was found that self efficacy was evidence d as its own theme as well as by the confidence to increase co mmunication with colleagues, change curriculum, and change curriculum instruction. While p articipants were found to enter the course with a strong intrinsic motivation to connect und to further develop throughout the program. Small group discussions contributed to increased self motivation of participants by peers helping each other to develop their ideas and encourage each other to make the course changes. Learning about the work of others and how colleagues had become successful and reached students led participants to be self motivated and to infuse what they had learned from their colleagues into their own courses. Connecting ional, and academic goals created
103 s elf efficacy and intrinsic motivation and allowed them to work together to create th e experience of change throughout and following completion of the faculty development certification program.
104 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION This research worked to understand the changes that were experienced by those participating in a faculty development certification program at Citrus Grove Community College. This chapter will revisit the research results discussed in chapter 4 and connect the f indings to prior research. The first research question was designed through the lens of s ocial cognitive theory and will be analyzed using this framework. The second research question will be analyzed through the lens of s ymbolic interactionism The signif icance of the themes and the relationship between the results and the research questions and frameworks that guided the research will be examined. In addition, I will discuss the implications for faculty development and higher education leadership. Finally I will present my conclusions and recommendations strengths and limitations of the research, and possibilities for the direction of future research. Connecting the Literature Faculty Development Faculty Development has traditionally been limited to ass isting faculty in developing skills that need to be implemented into their practice. It is focused on teaching faculty about tools to improve instruction (Amundsen et al., 2005). Austin and Sorcinelli (2013) have discussed how new faculty development progr ams will need to assist faculty in taking their work and connecting it to the broader community which will lead to deeper student learning. The participants in this study were found to consistently take what they had learned within the program and communic ate it to colleagues outside the program. In addition, they were found to make changes in an effort to help students more completely understand the material, even when that meant focusing on
105 less material. This study did not work to understand how the chan ges may have deepened student learning, but it should be noted that deeper student learning and understanding was consistently found as one of the goals of the changes made by participants. The participation for this study included faculty from various fie lds of study. Research on faculty development that crosses disciplines has been scarce. The results experiences and how faculty can be energized by the ideas of faculty in other disciplines. In addition, this type of collaboration works toward institutional goals for cross discipline instruction and engagement. Faculty and Institutional Changes Over the years, the faculty role has changed with faculty being expected to have increased engagement with students, the institution, and the community (Amundsen et al 2005). This may be because as McArthur (2005) found increased interaction between students and faculty produces an increase in overall student satisfaction with thei r college experience. The results of this study show how faculty development courses might be used to increase student engagement to lead to student satisfaction. In addition, the literature has shown that student retention may be related to academic advis ing (Suvedi, Ghimire, Millenbah, Lansing, & Shrestha, 2015) The program used in this study aimed to arm faculty with the information and knowledge of resources that could be used to advise students. With faculty experiencing increased self efficacy as a r esult of learning about the information and resources, several participants reported feeling more comfortable in this advising role.
106 Williamson, Goosan, and Gonzales (2014) found that faculty advising has traditionally meant that a discipline specific facu lty member was assigned to a particular student Therefore, students were rarely advised on many issues including understanding career options, financial aid, personal challenges, or academic challenges. The results of this study showed how participants fo und themselves advising students on these issues in a non official faculty advisor role. Dillon and Fisher (2000) found that faculty advising plays an integral role in the success and retention of students I t is important that students receive a satisfact ory advising experience. With an increased number of faculty educated on how to advise students, students may choose to engage with faculty they feel comfortable with even if that faculty member is outside their discipline and/or not their official assigne d faculty advisor. In addition to advising, faculty have been asked to increase their communication with the community to promote buy in from external members (Lou, 2014). The participants in this study were found to engage with family and friends more as a result of completing the program. According to Marcus (2014) this communication may result in increased external support for the college. Much of the literature about faculty changes in colleges surrounds the increase in adjunct faculty and the need to motivate and instruct this population on understanding the resources of the college, as well as filling the same role of advising as full time faculty members (West, 2010). Swearingen and Hayes (2009) suggest that using faculty development to help adjunct instructors understand their full responsibilities will lead to increased commitment, retention, and job satisfaction. Five of the seven participants in this study worked as adjunct faculty at the time of completing the program and the
107 results show how the program was used to increase their confidence in accessing college resources and filling their role as an unofficial advisor to students. Several of the participants reported how the program resulted in them feeling more connected to their colleagues and the college. While adjuncts were not the population for this study and adjunct retention because of the program was not identified, Hoyt (2012) suggests that intent to remain at the institution is largely motivated by intrinsic rewards. Intrinsic Motivati on combination of self efficacy and intrinsic motivation is needed to explain These results of this study help to further understand the connec tion between self efficacy and intrinsic motivation. Faculty members were found to have experienced increased self efficacy and reported non monetary motivation for their changes in behavior as a result of this increase. Prior research has found that being encouraged to work together with colleagues can help create social bonds and furthe r intrinsic motivation (Carr & Walton, 2014). The participants in this study found themselves being encouraged to work in small groups and reported that social connections were formed as a result. Research Question 1 and Social cognitive theory Research Question 1 looked to answer: How do instructors who complete a professional development program at a community college describe their experiences with changes in their own s elf efficacy? This research question looked at the importance of self s ocial cognitive theory Social cognitive theory suggests that learning occurs through a process of cognitive, behav ioral, and environmental factors. This theory suggests that
108 change is created when an individual is motivated through self influences that are created by their interactions with their environment. Without self efficacy, changes in behavior will not occur. This research used an adaptation of the General Self Efficacy Scale (GSE) to understand the faculty member self efficacy and its relationship to the changes that occurred. The questions included for the adaptation of this scale looked at self efficacy in relationship to: changes after the course, why change was not created prior to the course, changes in instruction, changes in the role at the college, and possible future changes. S elf efficacy has been presented as a theme in itself How self efficacy rel ates to the conceptual framework of Social cognitive theory and the five areas as a part of the GSE will be discussed in this section. Changes Following Course Participants indicated that the changes that were made during and following the course may have been a result of the participants feeling more confident in their abilities to make changes and being able to adapt to changes in their course. Raja discussed how she would now feel more comfortable accessing materials during class. Even if Raja knew abou taking too much time while she figured out where and how to navigate the resources in front of the class. Now that she is confident in her abilities, she has more confidence in ada pting to the class situations and discussions that arise and accessing resources in communication, July 16, 2017).
109 In addition to self efficacy affecting the confidence of the instructors to make adaptations in the course, the course also led to an increase in communication with others. For all the participants this meant making connections with those in t he cohort with them and continuing that communication following the program. The participants all described how they communicated about what they had learned in the program with those outside the program. Because of this communication, it would be importan t for the information within the program to be accurate and easily understandable. This also means that when a cohort is very small, as it was with Howard and Susan, the information is spreading beyond the small cohort and reaches a wider audience. This wi ll be an even greater impact with the larger cohorts. It is evident that the self efficacy of the participants and their belief that they have a strong understanding on how to access and use college resources quickly and efficiently led to several changes following the program in both attitude and behavior for all the participants. This also increased their ability to communicate this information with others Three of the seven themes, including communication change, changes in curriculum focus, and changes in curriculum delivery, are related to lasting changes after completion of the program as a result of the self efficacy theme that was found. Factors That Made Changes Possible Three of the themes that were found across the participants were not just the experience of actual changes that occurred, but the factors that made those changes possible. Motivation for taking the course, time and space provided during the program, as well as the use of small groups for rich discussions during to face meetings were found to be a necessary context Setting these as requirements for the course would lead participants to mak e changes. All the participants were motivated
110 with intrinsic reasons to take the course, even though monetary rewards were avai lable for completion of the program. It is possible that if the motivations were found to be only monetary, we would not see the self efficacy changes that resulted for the participants Their desire to increase their own self efficacy is likely a motivati ng factor working to make that increase. This fits with what we know about intrinsic motivation from the research. Guo et al. (2014) has found that intrinsic motivation is longer lasting than other forms of motivation. This suggests that the intrinsic moti vation of the participants to take the course has led to the lasting changes that followed the p rogram. While the General Self Efficacy S cale is used to measure perceived self efficacy, and cannot measure the specific changes, this study helps to show the relationship between how the perceived self efficacy may have resulted in the participants making changes, as reported by the participants themselves Changes in Instruction Two of the themes, change in curriculum focus and change in curriculum delivery w ere found because of the participants completing the program, learning about the resources, and finding an increased self efficacy. Participants found that they made a change in focusing their curriculum so that the students really understood concepts even when this meant that not all the course material was able to be covered. The participants explained that this was really because of the communication that occurred inside and outside of the program. Jerrica discussed how her small group specifically talke d about this idea and how she has also shared this idea of a more targeted curriculum approach with colleagues outside the program. Self efficacy was found to indirectly affect this change as it was responsible for the increased communication that directly resulted in the change of a targeted curriculum focus. Carmen also found that
111 she increased the amount of career focused discussions after communicating with other professors about their practice and realizing she could set the material aside to have thes e conversations. With instructors feeling more confident in their abilities and communicating more with others about new strategies, all the participants were able to make changes to the way they delivered material. Shana, Carmen, Raja, Kimber and Jerrica expressed a change in the way they communicated material to the students, with an increased focus on having meaningful discussions about student goals. While Howard and Susan were no longer in a teaching role, they found that the course affected their com munication with students in their staff roles at the college. The increased self efficacy led both to have confidence in making changes to their instruction and to increase communication by helping them gain new and innovative ideas about what other instru ctors are using in the classroom and what instructors have been successful implementing in their instruction. Changes in Role When looking at the research and understanding efficacy may have changed their role at the college, we find that their role as a communicator and as a resource for their colleagues has changed across all participants. Susan and Howard both discuss how they are now more comfortable in engaging in conversations with colleagues. Jerrica, Shana, Raja now feel t hat they have more information and knowledge to share. Kimber and Carmen have found that conversations about the program now come up regularly in their work. The research did not show that, across participants, there was any notable change in their actual work at the college. While it may have indirectly affected
112 committee work and research through the conversations that are occurring during those meetings and work, the research did not find an increase to the number of committees or change in the types of committees or other participant involvement at the college While it was found to help Shana mentor other faculty, this was a goal of hers prior to the program. The increase in knowledge and understanding allowed her to become a mentor, but the decision t o become a mentor was not the direct result of the program. Jerrica found herself with increased involvement with initiatives at the college, but these happened alongside participation in the program and were not a direct result. Most of the participants f ound that the increased communication le d to changes within the work they were already engaged in and not an increase in the actual role at the college. Anticipated Future Changes Participants indicated that, while they may not have specific changes plann ed for future courses or student and colleague interaction, they will continue to be more intentional in their practice, as well as in their conversations with students and colleagues. While Howard, Susan, and Raja are not currently teaching courses, they plan to implement what they learned from the program in any future courses and will continue to utilize what they have learned in their current position at the college. Kimber did not teach speech following the completion of the program, only during the pr ogram B ut she looks forward to teaching that course in the fall of 2017 and has plans to imbed the student success strategies she experimented with during the program. Shana looks forward to continuing conversations with colleagues and acting as a mentor when possible. Jerrica and Carmen will continue the strategies they have worked on as they continue teaching their courses. The course allowed the participants to take the time and space to experiment with strategies which they will now continue to use ba sed on
113 what they learned. If given more time and space to continue developing their work, more adaptations may occur. Research Question 2 and Symbolic interactionism Research Question 2 examines how instructors who complete a professional development prog ram at a community college describe their experiences with changes in their ow n intrinsic motivation. For this question, s ymbolic interactionism was used to understand how participants might describe their intrinsic motivation. Charon (1998) explains that symbolic interactionism includes five central focuses: t he human as a social person t he human as a thinking person t he human as a person defining their own environment t he human as a person affect ed by their current environment, and t he human as an acti ve being in their environment. Each of these lenses were examined to further understand what may have motivated the participants. By looking at these five factors, we can further understand how participants construct and reconstruct their learned meanings and how this new learned meaning can motivate a participant to make changes in behavior or thoughts. This research question works with the first research question that examines self efficacy. While we have learned that participants have increased self eff icacy and how this has created changes, Symbolic interactionism can be used to further understand this relationship and how the participants developed learned meanings that led to self efficacy changes. Human as a S ocial P erson The participants were signi ficantly engaged in relationship s within and outside of their cohort. Within the cohort, meetings occurred for participants to engage with each other about strategies to implement student success skills into the classroom. In
114 addition to sharing informatio n about the program and their practice with cohort members, several of the participants indicated that the discussions within the meetings communication, June 8, 2017). Kimber stressed that she enjoyed (Kimber, personal communication, June 6, 2017). Shana and Jerrica both forged several relationships with colleagues that they have continued to become friends with Carmen expressed that she still stops in to talk to a fellow cohort member that she the program. The participants spoke of the meetings as more friendly gatherings rather than work meetings and expressed enjoyment at getting to know their colleagues. This friendly interaction was found to carry on outside of the meetings with the partic ipants sharing with others. Many shared within their personal lives, including Raja and Howard, while Jerrica found herself sharing the information with other part time faculty experiencing similar difficulties reaching their students. Carmen found that sh e would share in a variety of settings as a dean and faculty member. This further shows how the participants wanted to continue as social individuals beyond the cohort. The results of this study show how the participants felt a need to be social by sharing information in and out of their cohorts. Symbolic interactionism helps us to understand that the human as a social being looks to interact with others in an effort to define ourselves. This is reflected in the participants descriptions of how communicati ng with others during the program helped
115 them She found from her social interactions during the program that it might benefit the student most to focus on help ing them understand some of the material instead of just covering all the material (Jerrica, personal communication, May 25, 2017). Human as a Thinking Person As a thinking person, individuals are able to analyze their social interactions and analyze the e xperiences of other s to help them further understand themselves and their own practices (Charon, 1998). The participants in this research were highly social and aware of how they could learn from the experiences of their colleagues and think about how to i ncorporate those ideas into their own programs and share their ideas to assist allowed her to think about what else she could be doing based on the experiences of others (Jerrica, personal communication, May 25, 2017). Symbolic interactionism can help us see the need for a participant to be able to analyze their interactions as a social person (Charon, 1998). One of the themes found in this research described the participants need for time and space. This is a necessity because it gave them the ability to take time to think about the changes they could make in and out of their classroom They could also take time to think about how best to implement the learned strategies. While the time and space allowed for the sharing of ideas, it was the ability to focus on thinking about these ideas and how they would best eeds that led to the faculty member being able to implement the changes.
116 Human as Defining, Affected by, and Active B eings in their Environment Part of Symbolic interactionism their own environment, become affected by their environment, and have constant interaction within their environment. Participants in the program found themselves heavily affected by the experiences of others. According to Jerrica, she felt good about learning from the experiences of o thers, but also by the ability to assist her colleagues with their ideas. Carmen also found herself wanting to affect the practices of those around her and especially wanting to help those who worked for her as a dean to understand the importance of incorp orating student success strategies and a meaningful connection to student work in their courses. These examples help to illustrate how the participants wanted to define and affect their own environments and how having the learning self efficacy, after bein g affected by their own environment, led to this ability. In this way, we can see how participants consistently learned from their environment in the cohort and how they took what they learned to help define their environments outside of the cohort. This l ed to them being active in their environment as suggested by Charron (1998). Summary By analyzing how the participants used their social interactions, their analysis of these interactions, and their interaction with thei r environment, we can better underst and how the faculty constructed and reconstructed their learned meaning to lead to deeper intrinsic motivation. Before the program began, a ll the participants expressed an intrinsic motivation of wanting to further help and assist students What was found is that self efficacy was increased throughout the program, which also included learning from the social interactions that took place and the experiences of others. These factors
117 led to an even greater intrinsic motivation for the participants to continue reaching students in ways that they see their colleagues doing. Kimber was able to discuss with her colleagues how she used time management skills in her course and how this ohort colleagues wanted to learn more about and implement in their own practice. Participants were found to be motivated by their own stimulation in their ability to help others succeed. Because the participants could reconstruct their own meanings and un derstandings based on their interactions and environment, they were able to become motivated by their own self efficacy. When asked what made advising students a rewarding experience, Karr L ilienthal, Lazarowicz, McGill, and Menke (2013) found that persona l interactions and being able to help students were key responses from faculty This suggests that ability to feel confident in answering student questions and being able to have interactions with students that make the faculty member feel valuable, as the results of this study show, will increase intrinsic motivation and result in faculty further choosing to engage in these opportunities. Significance of Findings The last step of (1978) phenomenological a pproach involved having the participants review the themes and determine how significant the theme may have been to each participant and across the participants. Table 5 shows each theme and There are two rows for the theme of changes in curriculum delivery due to the identification of eight original themes prior to the participant responses After the research, two of the themes were
118 found to be so closely related that they were combined. One participant did not respond to the survey and therefore six responses were identified Table 5 1. Respondent Validation of Themes Theme Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Neither Agree or Disagree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree Motivation for Course Participation 2 3 1 Time and Spac e 5 1 Small Groups for Rich Discussions 3 2 Communication Change 5 1 Change in Curriculum Focus 3 3 Change in Curriculum Delivery (Question 1) 3 3 Change in Curriculum Delivery ( Question 2) 2 3 Change in Self Efficacy 5 1 Table 5 1 shows how each theme was found to be applicable across participants and suggests the significance of each theme Time and space, c ommunication change and s elf efficacy were found to be the major themes that crossed all participants, with five of the six respondents finding that the theme strongly related to their experiences. The true experience of change on the part of the participant were identified through the additional themes of changes in self efficacy, curriculum focus, curriculum delivery, and communication. After carefully reviewing the experiences of the participants and their feedback on the themes that were found, two multi faceted significant findings were identified: 1)
119 the needs of time and space, motivation, and small group discussion are important in leading to change s in behavior ; and 2) self efficacy plays a major role in increasing intrinsic mo tivation and affecting behavior. The themes can be divided into needs of the participants to create changes, and the actual changes that were made. Motivation for taking the program, the use of time and space during the program, and the importance of small group discussions were all vital to serving the needs of the participants that would lead to changes in the course. These themes were found to cross over many of the participants because they provided the setting and context that would allow for the changes to occur. Self efficacy was identified as a theme in itself, but was also found to heavily influence the other themes. The change in self efficacy provided the foundation to make behavioral changes in the curriculum focus, curriculum delivery, and communication. When participants discussed their increased confidence in understanding the resources at the college or how to address questions f rom faculty and staff, this led to a behavior change within the curriculum or communication. In addition, the need for self efficacy was found to be a motivating factor for participation in the program. It is possible that those who chose to take this cour se desired increased self efficacy and that may have contributed to the participants working to purposely increase knowledge and self efficacy. Implications for Practice and Policy Faculty Development Professional development will need to evolve continuou sly to meet the needs of faculty. These needs may vary from institution to institution, but there are some key changes that the literature has shown to cross institutions. Faculty development
120 programs are no longer look ing to just inform faculty on how to perform a certain skill, but to ingratiate faculty into the culture and mission of the institution as well as to elevate their teaching practice, institutional relationships, and conversations in their community Leaders in faculty development will need to rethink their design and delivery of faculty development courses to meet the needs to the institution. The research from th is study can help leaders in faculty development to design a program that meets the needs of the faculty This would include enc ouraging faculty members to take the time and space to work in small groups with others and to take the time to be more intentional in their work. The theme of small groups for rich discussions was found to be reported as the most memorable and important a spect of the faculty Therefore, faculty development leaders creating a faculty development program would want to include this in to the design of their program. This can be done by designing the program to foster small group communicat ion in repeated sessions with the same faculty. While development leaders often look to design a course in an online format for easy convenience of the faculty member, they should understand that having repeated face to face sessions was reported as a key aspect of the program researched and is what led to the rich discussions and development of meaningful relationships. This research found that having a program where these groups meet in repetition and in a cohort model to encourage the formation of social bonds leads to a l asting effect. While extrinsic motivation was available through various incentive programs for some of the participants of the program, all of the participants in this study reported being intrinsically motivated to take the program and found that this motivation
121 increased as they were inspired by the work of others. While monetary reward s may be superficially beneficial, providing faculty with the ability to find meaning in their work will be important to create a context where faculty continue to want to improve upon their practice and make changes that further help their students. A review of the themes of motivation for course participation and change in self efficacy can help program developers to design a program that encourages an awareness and development of self efficacy, which was found to lead to increased intrinsic motivation. Faculty development leaders will also want to communicate with their administration to further understand the mission and values of the institution How can administration use faculty development to help faculty understand the values of the administration ? F aculty development can work as a communication tool between faculty and administration to help in the dissemination of information and to make sure fa culty feel confident in understanding, describing, and ultimately communicating with others about the values of the institution. Reviewing the themes of motivation to participate in the course, small groups for rich discussions, and a change in self effica cy can be used by faculty development leaders to design a program that meets the needs of the faculty member while communicating with them the mission and values of the institution. Higher Education Administrators It is important for higher education admi nistrators to understand how their faculty are motivated to make behavioral changes that align with the mission of the institution. Higher education administrators will need to consider how they want to construct their f aculty development departments and h ow they can work with the departments to provide faculty with the necessary time and tools to create change. Higher education administrators will need to think about what is important for their faculty to understand
122 about their position at the college The y can then use faculty development programs as a way of communicating this to their faculty. Throughout this research it became apparent that Citrus Grove Community College felt a strong commitment to having faculty members feel empowered to be non officia l advisors to students and to feel confident in helping lead students in areas outside their curriculum. In addition, the institution wanted faculty to be able to connect the curriculum to what students would be encountering in their personal and professio nal lives outside academia. This was not evident from any t ype of directive or direct communication to the faculty, but from the faculty development program that was designed in a way that faculty felt they were being encouraged by administration to take t he time to participate in this program. Administrators in higher education call look at the theme of time and space when developing their professional development departments. While this study focused on the time and space that faculty needed for rich disc ussion of their teaching practice, administration can use this theme to help them understand how their faculty development administrators will also need to take time and space to think through the design of their programs. One of the findings within this t heme was the need to communicate with those that may have an outside view. For this study, that included faculty in various departments. For faculty development that might mean communicating with other institutions or attending conferences If a college ha s multiple campuses and a decentralized faculty development department, then it may also include opportunities for conversations across campuses. Each institution should look at what they find to be their particular values and how faculty might be able to become confident in understanding these values in a way
123 that allows them to feel comfortable in communicating them with their colleagues. Looking at how faculty where able to increase their self efficacy in this study will be important for administrators t o understand to reach their own faculty. Higher education administrators can use faculty development programs as a way of showing what is valued by administration and as a tool to disseminat e this information, not only to those in the program, but to those that program members will be communicating with during and following the program. With encouragement from the administrators in higher education, faculty may feel more motivated to participate in development programs and see how leadership values their t ime and effort. H igher education administrators can use these recommendations in designing their faculty development department by providing them with the time and space, as well as the small work group atmosphere to brainstorm ideas for the department an d design their courses in a way that aligns with the needs and values of the administration. It is also important to note that many of the faculty in this study used wi th those outside the institution This aligns with the suggestion of Austin and Sorcinelli (2013 ) to use faculty development to help faculty connect their work to the broader community and the suggestion of The Economist (2012) for administration to furthe r communication with the community to promote buy in. With community colleges looking to further understand the communities in which they are located and the areas in which they serve, how faculty are communicating with those outside the institution will b e important to understand.
124 Implications for Theory and Research This research analyzed how social cognitive theory and symbolic interactionism can be used to further understand the role of self efficacy in leading to behavioral changes of faculty members. efficacy would increase intrinsic motivation and motivate faculty to make changes in and out of the classroom. In addition, the use of symbolic interactionism to further understand how intrinsic moti vation is used to affect changes in behavior resulted in a focus on the five central focuses: the human as a thinking person, social person, person defining environment, person affected by their environment, and as active beings in their environment. Parti cipants were found increase intrinsic motivation and make changes in and out of the classroom as a result of these five focuses, further confirming the importance of these five focuses in understanding motivation. The participants in this study were found to have increased communication with both their cohort members and those outside the program. It would be interesting to analyze how the faculty who were outside of the cohort may have been affected. While we know that the information was communicated to them, we do not know if it was done in a way that would make the program an effective tool in increasing self efficacy and creating behavioral changes to those outside the program. While it was not the goal of this study to learn about how the students wer e affected, future research may want to look at the way students were affected by the efficacy, increased intrinsic motivation, and changes in communication, curriculum, and course design and delivery. Prior research has sho wn that student retention and success increases with detailed and continuous advising
125 ( Suvedi, Ghimire, Millenbah, Lansing, & Shrestha, 2015). As faculty members reported that increased self efficacy led to an increase in feeling more comfortable advising students, it would be helpful to study how such advising affected student retention and success Strengths and Limitations of the Research Strengths The experiences reported in this research were truly the experiences as reported by the participants th researc h analysis the research began by reviewing each interview conducted by the researcher three times and ended with the participants validating the themes that were found. This process ens ured that the experiences and themes described were reflective and representative of the experiences as remembered and felt by the participants in this study Limitations This research is the result of faculty volunteering to participate in the student gu idance system certification program and also volunteering to complete an interview about the program. This may result in self reported response bias that suggests that participants may choose to answer questions in a way that they believe the interviewer i s looking for. According to Austin, Gibson, Deary, McGregor, and Dent (1998 ), Response bias is usually more of a concern for questionnaires. Interviews provide a setting where a par ticipant may become more comfortable to be open and honest in their answers and feedback.
126 A concern that was found in previous literature about reaching adjunct faculty through development programs was the ability to reach all types of adjuncts from variou s disciplines including those who want ed to remain adjuncts and those looking to move into the full time role. The adjunct participants sampled for this study mostly wanted to move into a full time role, in some capacity, at the institution. How the progr am could be used to reach a faculty member wanting to remain in an adjunct role cannot be understood by this study. In addition, all participants were volunteers for both the program that was studied and the research itself. The results of this study may h ave implications for the larger group, but the experiences were only those of the participants in this research study and cannot be assumed to cross into other participants or those in other faculty development programs at the college. Conclusion The pres ent study helped to further understand how experiences change d within a faculty development certification program for integrating a student success skills guidance program into their course. Participants were found to be intrinsically motivat ed and were in need of the time and space, and small group discussions. When these conditions were met participants found themselves with an increased level of confidence in their abilities to understand, access, and use the resources provided by the coll ege. This increase in self efficacy lead to increased communication inside and outside the classroom as well as changes made to the curriculum they taught and how they taught it. As faculty development courses, programs and staff increase, leaders in facu lty development and higher education will need to understand what motivates faculty to
127 participate in the courses/programs and how they should be designed to maximize the effectiveness on participants. The present research shows how small group interaction s in a cohort model where participants regularly mee t with colleagues to form connections, both within and outside their own discipline, can help faculty to learn from the experiences of others and modify their courses. Higher education leaders should look at how they want to use the courses/programs to help align faculty engagement with the mission and values of the institution.
128 APPENDIX A PARTICIPATION REQUEST Good morning, My name is April Raneri and I am contacting you as a doctoral candidate f rom the University of Florida in their Leadership in Education Administration progr am. I earned my b ganizational Communication and m Communication from the University of Central Florida. My dissertation will focu s on self efficacy formation and intrinsic motivation of faculty who have completed the student guidance system certification program. As a faculty member who has completed the student guidance system certification, your participation in interviews fo r this research is requested. This research will include two 40 60 minute interviews 1 2 weeks apart. A recording of this interview will be kept in confidence and precautions to ensure anonymity throughout the research will be taken. At the beginning of th e first interview you will be asked to sign a participant consent form and complete a one page demographic questionnaire. Following data collection and all interviews, you will receive a summary page of themes to review and reflect upon. This study wil l only involve no more than minimal risk for the participants. While there are no direct benefits for the participants, the data collected may have significance for future practice, research, and policy. If you are willing to allow me to interview you, please contact me with a time and location most convenient for you If you have any questions or concerns about the study, please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to speaking with you and thank you for your support in this research. Sin cerely, April Raneri Doctoral Candidate University of Florida
129 APPENDIX B CALENDAR APPOINTMENT TEXT First In terview Calendar Appointment Te xt Thank you for taking the time to participate in this research. As a reminder, this interview will take approx imately 40 60 minutes. A recording of this interview will be kept in confidence and precautions to ensure anonymity throughout the research will be taken. Our first interview will consist of open ended questions about your experiences throughout the studen t guidance system certification. Please keep in mind that our discussions may evolve beyond these questions. If you have any questions or concerns about the study, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, April Raneri Doctoral Candidate Universi ty of Florida Second In terview Calendar Appointment Te xt Thank you for taking the time to participate in this research. As a reminder, this interview will take approximately 40 60 minutes. A recording of this interview will be kept in confidence and precautions to ensure anonymity throughout the research will be taken. Our second interview will consist of open ended questions about the meaning behind your experiences throughout the student guidance system certification Please keep in mind that our d iscussions may evolve beyond these questions. If you have any questions or concerns about the study, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, April Raneri Doctoral Candidate University of Florida
130 APPENDIX C PARTICIPANT INFORMED CONSENT FORM UF IRB Study # 201700490 CITRUS GROVE IRB Study # 17 0014 Protocol Title: Forming Identity through Faculty Development Purpose of the Research Study : I am conducting a study to explore the self efficacy formation and intrinsic motivation of faculty w ho have completed the student guidance system certification program. What you will be asked to do in the study: In this study, you will be asked to complete a short demographic questionnaire along with two 40 60 minute interviews to take place 1 2 weeks a part. Time Required: 80 120 minutes Risks and Benefits: This study will only involve no more than minimal risk for the participants. While there are no direct benefits for the participants, the data collected may have significance for future practice, research, and policy. Compensation: No compensation is provided for this study. Confidentiality: All information will be handled in a strictly confidential manner and will be submitted anonymously, so that no one will be able to identify you when the r esults are recorded/reported. All information is subject to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974, which is designed to protect the privacy of educational records. Voluntary participation: Your participation in this study is comple tely voluntary. There is no penalty for not participating. Right to withdraw from the study : You have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without consequence. Who to contact if you have questions about the study : April Raneri Graduate Stude nt, School of Human Development & Organizational Studies in Education
131 Who to contact about your rights as a research participant in the study IRB02 Office University of Florida Agreement I have read the procedure described above. I voluntarily agree t o participate in the procedure and I have received a copy of this description. __________________________________________________________________ Participant Date __________________________________________________________________ Principal Inve stigator Date
132 APPENDIX D CONTEXT AND DEMOGRAPHICS QUESTIONNAIRE 1. Name:________________________________________________________________ 2. What is your Gender (check one)? ___Male ___Female 3. Highest level of education (check one)? ___Bachelo ___Doctorate 4. How many years have you been teaching at Citrus Grove Community College ?___________________ 5. What is your current position at CGCC ? ___Part time instruction ___Full time (non tenure) ___Full time (tenured) __Staff Other:__ _____________ 6. If Applicable, please list any courses that you have taught or are currently teaching: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ 7. Approximatel y how many professional development courses have you completed?_________________________ 8. In what Month/Year did you begin your Student Guidance System Certification?________ 9. In what Month/Year did you complete your Student Guidance System Certification?_ _______ 10. Have you COMPLETED any of the following professional d evelopment programs in addition to Student Guidance System Certification (Check all that apply)? ___Active Learning Certification ___Associate Faculty Certification ___Destination Program ___D igital Professor Certification ___SEED Program ___Seneff Faculty Dev. Program ___Study Abroad Leader Certification 11. Are you currently IN PROGRESS of completing any of the followin g professional d evelopment programs in addition to Student Guidance System C ertification (Check all that apply)? ___Active Learning Certification ___Associate Faculty Certification ___Destination Program ___Digital Professor Certification ___SEED Program ___Seneff Faculty Dev. Program ___Study Abroad Leader C ertification
133 APPENDI X E INTERVIEW PROTOCAL FIRST INTERVIEW First Interview The Lived Experience Interviewee:____________________________________________________________________ Time, Date and Location of First Interview___________ ________________________ ____ ____ Interview will begin with greetings, followed by a review and signing of the consent to participate form and completion of the contex t and demographic questionnaire. A brief he informed consent will be reviewed. 1. Would you tell me about the student guidance system certification program and why you decided to take it? 2. Would you describe some of the relationships that formed during the student guidance system certification pro gram with the other participants as well as the instructors? 3. Would you describe how you shared ideas with others in the student guidance system certification program and how they shared those ideas with you? 4. What were some of your thoughts about changes to your instruction while you were taking the student guidance system certification program ? Even if you didn't actually make those changes. 5. Would you describe any experience with the student guidance system certification program motivating you to make ch anges to your course that you had previously thought of, but had not implemented? 6. Would you describe any other changes to your courses or your teaching practice that you made as a result of the student guidance system certification program ? 7. Do you know of any changes that you may have assisted other participants to make in their teaching practices or role at the college?
134 APPENDIX F RELATIONSHIP: SYMBOLIC INTERACTIONISM RESEARCH QUESTION 2 FIRST INTERVIEW Symbolic I nteractionism Process incl Persons are active agents in constructing their own behaviors and do so in ways that do not sustain existing forms symbolic interactionism includes five central focuses: 1. The human as a social person 2. The human as a thinking person 3. The human as a person defining their own environment 4. The human as a person affected by their current environment 5. The human as active be ings in their environment Research Question 2: How do instructors who complete a professional development program at a community college describe their experiences with changes in their own intrinsic motivation? Conn ection: Research Question 2 to Symbolic I nteractionism : We can further understand intrinsic motivation by learning how a participant uses the five focuses to reconstruct their meanings. This is learn ed by understand ing the interactions that take place and how those motive a participant to change a behavior or thought. Question Interview Question Connection: To Theory and Research Question 2 1 Would you tell me about the student guidance system certification program and why you decided to take it? 2 Wou ld you describe some of the relationships that formed during the student guidance system certification program with the other participants as well as the instructors? Looks at the experience of the human as a social person, as a person defining their own e nvironment, as a person affected by their current environment, and as active beings in their environment. 3 Would you describe how you shared ideas with others in the student guidance system certification program and how they shared those ideas with you? Looks at the experience of the human as a social person, as a person defining their own environment, as a person affected by their current environment, and as active beings in their environment. 4 What were some of your thoughts about changes to your inst ruction while you were taking the student guidance system certification program ? Even if you didn't actually make those changes. Looks at the experience of the human as a thinking person.
135 5 Would you describe any experience with the student guidance syste m certification program motivating you to make changes to your course that you had previously thought of, but had not implemented? Looks at the experience of the human as a thinking person and as a person affected by their current environment. 6 Would you describe any other changes to your courses or your teaching practice that you made as a result of the student guidance system certification program ? Looks at the experience of the human as a thinking person and as a person affected by their current envir onment. 7 Do you know of any changes that you may have assisted other participants to make in their teaching practices or role at the college? Looks at the experience of the human as a person defining their own environment and as active beings in their en vironment.
136 APPENDIX G INTERVIEW PROTOCAL SECOND INTERVIEW Second Interview The Meaning of the Experience Interviewee:____________________________________________________________________ Time, Date and Location of First Interview___________ ________ ________________ ________ Interview will begin with greetings, followed by a reminder of the purpose for the research, the ights, and the informed consent. 1. Reflecting on the changes we previously discussed. What do you think made these chan ges possible? 2. Why do you think these changes were not implemented before taking the course? 3. How do you think these changes impacted your instruction? 4. How do you think these changes impacted your role at the college? 5. Given the experiences you have shared, how do you see these experiences affecting your future teaching practice?
137 APPENDIX H RELATIONSHIP: SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY RESEARCH QUESTION 1 SECOND INTERVIEW Social Cognitive T heory affect the 63). Looks at the emotional motivational relevance of the self identity and social interactions (Andersen & Chen, 2002). Focuses on the facu lty member' s perceptions of their own self efficacy. Research Question 1: How do instructors who complete a professional development program at a community college describe their experiences with changes in their own self efficacy? Connection: Research Question 1 to Social Cognitive T heory : Social cognitive theory can be used to understand a participant's self efficacy and how this may lead to making changes. Question Interview Question Connection: To Theory and Research Question 1 1 Reflecting on the changes we previously discussed. What do you think made these changes possible? Looks into the faculty member's self efficacy of how they were able to create change after the course. 2 Why do you think these changes were not implemented before taking the course? Looks into the faculty member's self efficacy of why change was not created prior to the course 3 How do you think these changes impacted your instruction? Looks into the faculty member's self efficacy of their instruction. 4 How do you think th ese changes impacted your role at the college? Looks into the faculty member's self efficacy of their role at the college. 5 Given the experiences you have shared, how do you see these experiences affecting your future teaching practice? Looks into the f aculty member's self efficacy of how their experience may change future teaching practices.
138 APPENDIX I JERRICA FIELD NOTES
139 APPENDIX J DISSERTATION THEME REVIEW AND FEEDBACK Name For the following eight theme s, please identify how strongly the theme applied to your experience of the Student Guidance System Certification Program and provide comments if needed. All information will be handled in a strictly confidential manner and will be submitted anonymously, so that no one will be able to identify you when the results are recorded/reported. ___________________________________________________________________ While the course was offered for professional development credit, the motivation to take the course was to help my students make a connection between the material and their personal, professional, and academic goals. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Optional Comments: __________________________________________________________ _________ Taking the Student Guidance System Certification program increased my knowledge and understanding of how to help students, which led to increased confidence in answering student questions. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Optional Comments: __________________________________________________________________ The Student Guidance System Certification program provided the time and space to allow me to think about and cultivate my ideas. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Ne ither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Op tional Comments: ___________________________________________________________________ The Student Guidance System Certification program changed how I think about my students and my course and how intentional I am when des igning my instruction, activities, materials, and/or other course components.
140 Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Optional Comments: ___________________________________________________________________ The Student Guidance Syst em Certification program changed how I think about my curriculum. I now understand the importance of focusing on student learning instead of getting through the material. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly d isagree Optional Comments: __________________________________________________________________ After completing the Student Guidance System Certification program, I shared my knowledge of the program with others. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disag ree Strongly disagree Optional Comments: ___________________________________________________________________ Using colleagues as resources and sharing ideas in small groups in the program were critical to the development of my ideas. Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither agree nor d isagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Optional Comments: ___________________________________________________________________ The Student Guidance System Certification program changed the way that I deliver material (discussions/tests) in my classroom. Strongly agree Somewhat a gree Neither agree nor disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Optional Comments:
141 APPENDIX K UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IRB APPROVAL LETTER
143 AP PENDIX L CITRUS GROVE COMMUNITY COLLEGE IRB APPROVAL LETTER
144 LIST OF REFERENCES Aldiabat, K. M., & Navenec, C. L. L. (2011). Philosophical roots of classical grounded theory: its foundations in symbolic interactionism The Qualitative Report 16 (4), 1063+. Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu /cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1121&context=tqr Amundsen, C., Abrami, P., McAlpine, L., Weston, C., Krbavac, M., Mundy, A., & Wilson, M. (2005). The what and why of faculty development in higher education: An in depth review of the literature. Presented at the AERA Annual Meeting, Montreal, 2005. Andersen, S. M., & Chen, S. (2002). The relational self: An interpersonal social cognitive theory. Psychological Review, 109 (4), 619 645. doi:10.1037/0033 295X.109.4.619 Austin, A. E., & Sorcinelli, M. D. (201 3). The future of faculty development: Where are we going? New Directions for Teaching & Learning, (133), 85 97. doi:10.1002/tl.20048 Austin, E. J., Gibson, G. J., Deary, I. J., McGregor, M. J., & Dent, J. B. (1998). Individual response spread in self rep ort scales: personality correlations and consequences. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 421 438. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019188699700175X Blumer, H. (1936 ). S ocial Attitudes and Nons ymbolic Interaction. Journal of Educational Sociology 9 515 23. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism : P erspective and method Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice Hall. Bevan, M. (2014). A method of phenomenological interviewing. Qualitative Health Research 24 (1) 136 144. doi:10.1177/1049732313519710 Bodner, G., & Orgill, M. (2007). Theoretical framework for research in c hemistry science education Upper Salle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Brandt, L. S. E., & Hayes, J. L. (2012). Broader impacts of undergraduate research at a community college: opening doors to new ideas. Council on Undergraduate Research Quarterly, 33 17+. Retrieved from http://www.cur.org/assets/1/7/331Fall12Brandt.pdf Burbank, P. M., & Martins, D. C. (2010). Symbolic interactionism and critical perspective: divergent or synergistic? Nursi ng Philosophy, 11 (1), 25 41. doi: 10.1111/j.1466 769X.2009.00421.x
145 Carr, P. B., & Walton, G. M. (2014). Cues of working together fuel intrinsic motivation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 53 169 184. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.03 .015 Carter, M. J., & Fuller, C. (2016). Symbols, meaning, and action: The past, present, and future of symbolic interactionism Current Sociology, 64 (6), 931 961. doi:doi:10.1177/0011392116638396 Chamberlain Salaun, J., Mills, J., & Usher, K. (2013). Link ing Symbolic interactionism and Grounded Theory Methods in a Research Design. SAGE Open, 3 (3), 2158244013505757. doi:doi:10.1177/2158244013505757 Chan, Z., Fung, Y. L., & Chien, W. T. (2013). Bracketing in phenomenology: only undertaken in the data collect ion and analysis process? The Qualitative Report Retrieved from http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol18/iss30/1/ Charon, J. (1998). Symbolic interactionism : A n introduction, an interpretation, an i ntegration. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Charon, J. (2007 ). Symbolic interactionism : an introduction, an interpretation, an integration. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall. Chen, X. (2013). Meta teaching: Meaning and strategy. Africa Educati on Review, 10 (sup1), S63 S74. doi:10.1080/18146627.2013.855431 Chen, G., Gully, S., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new general self efficacy scale. Organizational Research Methods. 4, 62 68 Cheng, P. Y., & Chu, M. C. (2014). Behavioral factors affec enroll in business ethics courses: A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and social cognitive theory using self identity as a moderator. Journal of Business Ethics, 124 (1), 35 46. doi:10.1007/s10551 013 1858 0 Christe nsen, W. (2016). Advising as activism Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2016/09/09/importance advising first generation students essay & M. King (Eds.), Existential phenomenological alternatives for psychology (pp. 48 71). New York: Oxford University Press. Cooley, C. (1902). Human nature and the social order New York, Scribner Creswell, J.W. (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications
146 DePasque, S., & Tricomi, E. (2015). Effects of intrinsic mot ivation on feedback processing during learning. NeuroImage, 119 175 186. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.06.046 Dillon, R. K. r. f. s. e., & Fisher, B. J. (2000). Faculty as part of the advising equation: An inquiry into faculty viewpoints on advising. NACADA Journal 20(1), 16 23. Douglas Greer, R., Dudek Singer, J., & Gautreaux, G. (2006). Observational learning. International Journal of Psychology, 41 (6), 486 499. doi:10.1080/00207590500492435 Edward, K., & Welch, T. (2011). The extens ion of Colaizzi's method of phenomenological enquiry. Contemporary Nurse: A Journal For The Australian Nursing Profession, 39 (2), 163 171. Gallant, A. (2014). Symbolic interactions and the development of women leaders in higher education. Gender, Work & Organization, 21 (3), 203 216. doi: 10.1111/gwao.12030 Guo, Y., Liao, J., Liao, S., & Zhang, Y. (2014). The mediating role of intrinsic motivation on the relationship between developmental feedback and employee job performance. Social Behavior and Personal ity: An International Journal 42 (5), 731+. Retrieved from https://www.sbp journal.com/index.php/sbp/article/view/3786 Handberg, C., Thorne, S., Midtgaard, J., Nielsen, C. V., & Lomborg, K. (2015). Revisiting Symbolic interactionism as a Theoretical Framework Beyond the Grounded Theory Tradition. Qualitative Health Research 25(8), 1023 1032. doi:doi:10.1177/1049732314554231 Harrison, A. W., Rainer Jr, R. K., Hochwarter, W. A., & Thompson, K. R. (1997). Testing the self efficacy performance linkage of social cognitive theory. Journal of Social Psychology, 137 (1), 79. Herman, J. H. (2012). Faculty development programs: The frequency and variety of professional development progr ams available to online instructors. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 16 (5), 87 106 Herman, J. H. (2013). Faculty incentives for online course design, delivery, and professional development. Innovative Higher Education 38 (5), 397 410. Honan, J. P., Westmoreland, A., & Tew, W. M. (2013). Creating a culture of appreciation for faculty development. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 2013 (133), 33 45. doi:10.1002/tl.20044
147 Hoyt, J. E. (2012). Predicting the satisfaction and loyalty of adjunct faculty. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 60 (3), 132 142. doi:10.1080/07377363.2013.722417 Clarification, adequacy, and responsiveness in semi structured teleph one and face to face interviews. Qualitative Research, 13 (1): 87 106. Jacobson, K. N. (2013). Building the roadmap to adjunct faculty success. Techniques: Connecting Education & Careers, 88 (4), 10. scendental phenomenology of imagination and its use for interdisciplinary research. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 4 (2), 121 132. doi:10.1007/s11097 005 0135 9 Jerusalem, M., & Schwarzer, R. (1992). Self efficacy as a resource factor in stress appraisal processes. In R. Schwarzer (Ed .), Self efficacy: Thought control of action (p. 195 213). Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Karr Lilienthal, L. K., Lazarowicz, T., McGill, C. M., & Menke, D. (2013). Faculty advisors' attitudes towards undergraduate adv ising in a College of Agriculture and Natural Sciences: a non experimental study. NACTA Journal 57, 35+. Krasinskaia, L. F. (2012). College instructors' preparedness for innovative transformations in higher education. Russian Education & Society, 54 (1), 55 63. Krefting, L. (1991). Rigor in qualitative research: the assessment of trustworthiness. American Journal of Occupational Therapy 45 (3), 214 222. Kuhn, M. (1964). Major trends in in symbolic interaction theory in the past twenty five years. The Soci ological Quarterly 5 (1), 61 84. Lal, B. B. (1995). Symbolic interaction theories. American Behavioral Scientist, 38 421+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.db29.linccweb.org/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u =lincclin_ccla&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA16659998&asid=bac 2f986e2b1966ab 2489aa86354e80f Lincoln, YS. & Guba, EG. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. LoConto, D. G., & Jones Pruett, D. L. (2006). The Influence of Charles A. Ellwood on Herbert Blumer and Symbolic interactionism Jou rnal of Classical Sociology, 6 (1), 75 99. doi:doi:10.1177/1468795X06061287
148 Luo, J. (2014). Higher Education and External Communities: Interconnectedness and Interdependence. The Vermont Connection 35(9). 70 78 Luthans, F., & Stajkovic, A. D. (1998). Soc ial cognitive theory and self efficacy: going beyond traditional motivational and behavioral approaches. Organizational Dynamics, 26, 62+. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedi rect.com/science/article/pii/S0090261698900067 Maines, D. (1981). Contemporary Sociology 10(3), 466 467. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.db29.linccweb.org/stable/2067413 Marcus, J. (2014, February 6). New analysis shows problematic boom in highe r ed administrators. The Huffington Post Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/06/higher ed administrators growth_n_4738584.html McAr thur, R. C. (2005). Faculty -based advising: an important factor in community college retention. Community College Review 32, 1+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.db29.linccweb.org/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lincclin_c cla&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA133494274& asid=44ac8cee207f293aceb346fcd8 8c60fd Martin, J. (2004). Self regulated learning, social cognitive theory and agency. Educational Psychologist, 39 (2), 135 145. McKee, C. W., & Tew, W. M. (2013). Setting the stage for teaching and learning in American h igher education: Making the case for faculty development. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 2013 (133), 3 14. doi:10.1002/tl.20041 Mead, George. H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society: From the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Mills, N. (2011). Teaching assistants' self efficacy in teaching literature: Sources, personal assessments, and consequences. The Modern Language Journal, 95 (1), 61 80. doi:10.2307/41262311 Moerer Urdahl, T., & Creswell, J. (2004). Using t ranscendental phenomenology to International Journal of Qualitative Methods 3(2), Article 2. Retrieved from http://www.ualberta.ca/~iiqm/backissues/3_2/html/moerercreswell.html Monk, A. (2013). Symbolic interactionism in Music Education: Eight Strategies for Collaborative Improvisation. Music Educators Journal, 99 (3), 76 81. doi:10.1177/0027432112467823
149 Mon tag, T., Campo, J., Weissman, J., Walmsley, A., & Snell, A. (2012). In their own words: Best practices for advising millennial students about majors. NACADA Journal 32(2), 26 35. Moore, L. (2012). Symbolic interactionism and Moral Hazards in Higher Educa tion. Administrative Issues Journal: Education, Practice & Research, 2 (2), 26 39. doi:10.5929/2012.2.2.3 Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage. Murayama, K., Matsumoto, M., Izuma, K., & Matsumoto, K. (201 0). Neural basis of the undermining effect of monetary reward on intrinsic motivation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107 (49), 20911 20916. http://doi.o rg/10.1073/pnas.1013305107 National Center for Educational Statistics, U.S. Department of Education (2016). Postsecondary Education: Faculty. In Digest of education statistics 2015 (chap. 3 ) Retrieved October 30, 2017, from the National center for Educa tion Statistics Website: https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d15/ Niehaus, K., Rudasill, K. M., & Adelson, J. L. (2012). Self Efficacy, Intrinsic Motivation, and Academic Outcomes Among Latino Middle School Students Participating in an After School Program. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 34 (1), 118 136. doi:0.1177/0739986311424275 Oliver, C. (2012). The Relationship Between Symbolic interactionism and Interpretive Description. Qualitative He alth Research, 22 (3), 409 415. doi:10.1177/1049732311421177 Paulus, M., van Dam, W., Hunnius, S., Lindemann, O., & Bekkering, H. (2011). Action effect binding by observational learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18 (5), 1022 1028. doi:10.3758/s13423 01 1 0136 3 Phillips, E. D. (2013). Improving advising using technology and data analytics. Change 45(1), 48 55. doi:10.1080/00091383.2013.749151 Pieters, H. C., Heilemann, M. V., Grant, M., & Maly, R. C. (2011, March). Older women's reflections on accessi ng care across their breast cancer trajectory: navigating beyond the triple barriers. Oncology Nursing Forum 38(2), 175+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.db29.linccweb.org/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lincclin_c cla&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA256072320&asid=9f69fa78d44266906dc110daaa 9fb1e6
150 Pisani, A. M., & Stott, N. (1998). An Investigation of part time faculty commitment to developmental advising. Research in Higher Education 39(2), 121 142. doi:10.1023/a:1018712630607 Prion, S. & Adamson, K. (2014). Making sense of methods and measurement: Rigor in qualitative research. Clinical Simulation in Nu rsing, 10 (2), e107 e108. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2013.05.003 Riehle, C. F. (2012). Inciting curiosity and creating meaning: Teaching information Public Services Quarterly, 8 (3), 227 234. doi:10.10 80/15228959.2012.702598 Romppel, M., Herrmann Lingen, C., Wachter, R., Edelmann, F., Dngen, H. D., Pieske, B., & Grande, G. (2013). A short form of the General Self Efficacy Scale (GSE 6): Development, psychometric properties and validity in an intercult ural non clinical sample and a sample of patients at risk for heart failure. GMS Psycho Social Medicine 10, Doc01. http://doi.org/10.3205/psm000091 Ruiz Lpez, M., Rodriguez Garca, M., Villanueva, P. G ., Mrquez Cava, M., Garca Mateos, M., Ruiz Ruiz, B., & Herrera Snchez, E. (2015). The use of reflective journaling as a learning strategy during the clinical rotations of students from the faculty of health sciences: An action research study. Nurse Educ ation Today 35(10), e26 e31 Ryan, R. M.; Deci, E. L. (2000). "Self determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well being". American Psychologist 55 (1): 68 78. doi:10.1037/0003 066X.55.1.68. Schols, M. (2012). Examining and understanding transformative learning to foster technology professional development in higher education. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 7 (1), 42 49. Schwarzer, R. (Ed.) (1992). Self efficacy: Thought con trol of action. Washington, DC: Hemisphere. Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized self efficacy scale. In J. Weinman, S. Wright, & M. Johnston, Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35 37). Windso r, UK: NFER NELSON. Schwarzer, R., & Fuchs, R. (1996). Self efficacy and health behaviors. In M. Conner & P. Norman (Eds.), Predicting health behavior: Research and practice with social cognition models (pp. 163 196) Buckingham, UK: Open University Press
151 Schwarzer, R., & Scholz, U. (2000). Cross Cultural Assessment of Coping Resources: The General Perceived Self Efficacy Scale. Paper presented at the First Asian Congress of Health Psychology: Health Psychology and Culture, Tokyo, Japan. Seidman, I. (20 12). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences (4 th ed.) New York: Teachers College Press. Shosha, G. A. (2012). Employment of Colaizzi's strategy in descriptive phenomenology: a reflection of a re searcher. European Scientific Journal 8 (27), 31+. Retrieved from http://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/viewFile/588/657 Sorcinelli, M. D. (2007 ). Faculty Development: The Challenge Going Forward Peer Review, 9(4), 4 8 Sorcinelli, M. D., A. E. Austin, P. L. Eddy, and A. L. Beach. (2006). C reating the future of faculty development: Learning from the past, understanding the present. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. Strom Gottfr ied, K., Dunlap, K. (2004). Assimilating adjuncts strategies for orienting contract faculty. Journal of Social Work Education, 40 (3), 445 452. Stryker, S. (1980 ). Symbolic interactionism : A social structural version. Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin Cummings Stryker, S. (1987). The vitalization of symbolic interactionism Social Psychology Quarterly, 50 (1), 83 94. Suvedi, M., Ghimire, R. P., Millenbah, K. F., & Shrestha, K. (2015). Undergraduate students' perceptions of academic advising. NACTA Journal 59, 227+. Retrieved from https://www.nactateachers.org/index.php/volume 59 number 3 september 2015/2314 underg raduate students perceptions of academic advising Swearingen, C. D., & Hayes, J. (2009). Faculty advising in nursing education: necessary evil or opportunity for excellence? International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship 6 (1), 8p. doi:10.2202/ 1548 923X.1762 Tabernero, C., & Hernndez, B. (2011). Self Efficacy and Intrinsic Motivation Guiding Environmental Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 43 (5), 658 675. doi:doi:10.1177/0013916510379759 Tareef, A. B. (2013). The relationship between mentoring and career development of higher education faculty members. College Student Journal 47 (4), 703+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.db29.linccweb.org/ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lincclin_c cla&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA356906585&asid=280a3be957fd766ca507492d 04834af4
152 The Economist. (2012, December 1). Higher education: Not what it used to be. The Eco nomist Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/21567373/print Thomas, E., & Magilvy, J. K. (2011). Qualitative rigor or research validity in qualitative research. Journal for Specialists In Pediatric Nursing 16 (2), 151 155. doi:10.1111/j.1744 6155.2011.00283.x mentoring: Does the name matter ? Science and Engineering Ethics 19(3), 1267 1281. doi:10.10 07/s11948 012 9366 7 Trainor, A. & Graue, E. (2014) Evaluating rigor in qualitative methodology and research dissemination. Remedial and Special Education 35(5), 267 274. Tufford, L., & Newman, P. (2010). Bracketing in Qualitative Research. Qualitativ e Social Work 1 1(1), 80 96. doi:10.1177/1473325010368316 Valencia College (2016), LifeMap Certification Retrieved from http://valenciacollege.edu/faculty/d evelopment/programs/LifeMapCertificatepage .cfm Whiting, L. S. (2008). Semi structured interviews: guidance for novice researchers. Nursing Standard, 22(23), 35+. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com.db29.linccweb.org /ps/i.do?p=AONE&sw=w&u=lincclin_c cla&v=2.1&it=r&id=GALE%7CA175630465 &asid=bf403adb9364d883377151f3e842b0fb Whitfield, T. S., & Hickerson, C. (2013). The difficult transition? Teaching, research, service: Examining the preparedness of communication faculty entering the academe. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 13 (1), 1 23. Williamson, L. V., Goosen, R. A., & Gonzalez Jr, G. F. (2014). Faculty advising to support student learning. Journal of Developmental Education 38(1), 20 24. Wolf, P. (2007). A model for facilitati ng curriculum development in higher education: A faculty driven, data informed, and educational developer supported approach. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 2007 (112), 15 20. doi:10.1002/tl.294 Wood, L. N., Vu, T., Bower, M., Brown, N., Skalicky, J., Donovan, D., . Bloom, W. (2011). Professional development for teaching in higher education. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology, 42 (7), 997 1009. doi:10.1080/0020739X.2011.608864
153 Yidong, T., & Xinxin, L. (2013). Innovative Work Behavior: A Perspective of Intrinsic Motivation. Journal of Business Ethics, 116 (2), 441 455. doi:10.1007/s10551 012 1455 7
154 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH April Raneri is a professor of communication and d epartment coordinator in communication. She graduated from the University of Central Flori degree in o rganizational communication with a minor in psychology. After completing her degree, she worked at an advertising agency where she wa s a c ommunications m anager for a variety of clients in need of recruitment advertising. While there she studied interpersonal and m ass m edia c ommunication at the University of Central t focused on health communication of childhood immunizations April has published her research on health communication in Child Care in Practice and has published research on the use of open educational resources in the Community College Journal of Researc h and Practice April started teaching English for academic purposes and student success in 2009 and currently teach es fundamentals of speech and i nterperson al communication while acting as the department coordinator and the president of the faculty assem bly at her campus.