r * " IEEEE\EEEEEBEEEEEEOEEEEEEEEEEEZEEI1 i 31""?wa E 31293 {'L‘1 f£:, .L- ' 3.3.915’i9 ‘ Find V 2;. ti: 2. ad My I 1 _ “4’ This is to certify that the dissertation entitled THE PERCEPTIONS AND BELIEF PATTERNS OF FACULTY MEMBERS IN THE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION TOWARD PUBLIC SERVICE presented by Rashidah Shuib has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. de ecu, Counseiing, EducationaI sychoTogy and SpeciaI Education <::7£;;::;en4¢/'52//v <——> E Major professor” [hue October 20, 1983 .MSU is an Affirmau'vr Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771 *_——r —— _— _. ._.._._ . __..___...k,#.__._v 7 _7 RETURNI 00k drop to P1ace in b remove this our reCOY‘ ' MSU LIBRARIES THE PERCEPTIO NS AND BELIEF PATTERNS OF FACULTY MEMBERS IN THE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION TOWARD PUBLIC SERVICE by Rad'n'dah Shujb A DISSE RTATIO N Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the reqm'rements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education 1983 '1’ © 1983 Copyr igh t RASHIDAH SHUIB ABSTRACT The Perceptions and Belief Patterns of Faculty Members in the College of Education Toward Public Service by Rashidah Shuib A descriptive study was conducted to examine the perceptions and belief patterns of faculty members in the Michigan State University College of Education toward public service. The main purpose of the study was to derive the types of public service activities which faculty perceived as appropriate for receiving load credit for public service. Two research instruments, (a) questionnaire and (b) card-sort, were deve10ped and administered to 53 respondents. The card-sort had 72 items, each describing what is generally considered as a type of public service. The respondents sorted the cards freely on a scale of one (definitely should NOT receive load credit for public service) to five (definitely should receive load credit for public service). Twenty-one items were sorted into the load credit category. These items had the elements of (a) on-going projects, university sponsored, and payment goes to the Rashidah Shuib university; (b) on-going projects, non-credit producing, faculty volunteer their time and receive no payments from the client institutions; (c) on-going projects, credit producing; (d) one-shot projects (one time projects), non- credit producing, and payment goes to the university; and (e) state/federal committees. In the NO load credit category, the items were generally on-going and one-shot projects in which the faculty involved received payments from the client institutions. Other activities were the departmental committee roles. Items sorted into the "undecided" category were mostly committee roles and one-shot projects in which faculty members volunteered their time and were not paid by the client institutions. Other findings were that faculty would like to apportion more time to public service and that the present reward system gives little consideration to public service. It was recommended that the College should formulate a policy and criteria for quality public service. It should establish a center and should develop .an institutionally sponsored public service program. DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Shuib Muhamad and Bedah Abdullah, for all their love and care despite the obstacles in their own lives. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It is impossible to acknowledge individually all those who have positively influenced my life--for there are many--but two of them are tOp on my list: Puan Halimah Omar and Puan Badiah Hj. Abd. Manan. They were two of my teachers whose dedication and love for their work extended beyond the classroom. I would also like to thank Dr. Lawrence Lezotte (dissertation director) for his patience and understanding and for his valuable advice and direction which have guided me up to the completion of this project. Thanks are also due to the other committee members: Drs. James Page (committee chair and advisor), Castelle Gentry, and Peggy Riethmiller, for their guidance and valuable suggestions throughout my entire doctoral study. A very special note of gratitude is reserved for Dick and Rami, Hawaii, who gave me a home when I badly needed one and who have always strengthened me with their love and moral support. I would also like to recognize two very special friends, Abdul Razak Habib and Martini Osman, for their friendship; as well as my family in Malaysia. My thanks also go to the Universiti Sains Malaysia for giving me the Academic Staff Training Scheme (ASTS) fellowship (1979- iii 1983) and the time extension when I so needed it; the Sage Foundation for granting me the Grants-in-Aid which assisted me in the final write-up of this dissertation; the Ford-WID fellowship for supporting my internship; Khalil Elaine, a statistical consultant with the Office of Research Consultation of Michigan State University; Professor Kamal Salih (USM); and the various authors whose work have contributed directly or indirectly to aw project. Last, but not least, my thanks go to all the faculty members of the College of Education at Michigan State University for their willingness to participate in my study despite their own busy schedules. Barbara Reeves did an admirable job typing this dissertation while Pat Nischan did wonders in her editing, given the limited time. The contributions made to this dissertation are numerous, but the shortcomings are my responsibility. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . x CHAPTER I: STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . 1 Institutional Context of the Study . . . . . . 4 Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Need for the Study . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Relevance and Contributions to Educational System Deve10pment . . . . . . . . . 11 Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Assumptions and Limitations of the Study . . . 15 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Definitions of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Public Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Academic Public Service . . . . . . . . . 18 Regular Faculty . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Research and Scholarship . . . . . . . . . 18 Teaching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Load Credit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Credit-Producing Activities . . . . . . . l9 Undecided Category . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Organization of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . 22 Public Service: the State of the Art . . . . . 22 Definitions of Public Service . . . . . . 23 Character of Research on Public Service in Higher Education . . . . . . . . . 27 Historical Development of Public Service in Brief . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Background: Michigan State University and the Land Grant Movement . . . . . . . 34 College of Education . . . . . . . 37 Relationships Between Public Service and Educational Systems Development . . . 39 Role Theory and Role Expectations: Relevance to Faculty Behavior Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER III: DESIGN OF THE STUDY . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . Population and Sample . - . - - . - - - Population . . . . . . . . . . . . Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . Card-Sort . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Collection Procedures . . . . . . Plan for Analyzing Data . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS OF DATA . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overview of the Research Questions . . Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Profile of the Sample . . . . . . Results for Research Questions . . No Load Credit . . . . . . . . . . Undecided . . . . . . . . . . . . Load Credit Items . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CHAPTER V: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . conClUSions O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDIX A: Questionnaire Presented to Faculty Members in the Sample . APPENDIX B: Classification Matrix of Functional Roles (Committees) External and Internal to the University . . APPENDIX C: Tree Analysis for "One-Shot" and "On-Going" Projects . . . . . . APPENDIX D: Card-Sort Instrument: List of Public Service Activities . . . vi 43 49 122 122 129 137 147 153 154 156 ww’ ——-‘ APPENDIX E: Faculty Consent Form and Instructions for Sorting the Card-Sort Instrument . . . . . . . . . 166 APPENDIX F: A Master List of the Items (Activities) with Means and Standard Deviations for Four Departments . . . . . . . . . . . 168 APPENDIX G: A Matrix of the Master List of the Activities: Load Credit, Undecided, and No Load Credit . . . . . 171 APPENDIX H: Frequency Tables of Item Means and Variances for Departments HPE, TE, EAC, and CEP . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180 vii 10. 11. 12. 13. LIST OF TABLES Important Dates in the Development of Public Service in American Universities . . Sample Population and Size by Departments: College of Education at MSU . . . . . . . . Profile of Faculty Members by Age . . . . . Profile of Faculty Members in the Sample by Rank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Profile of Faculty Members in the College of Education by Number of Years at Present Rank and Number of Years at MSU . . . . . . Experience in Teaching at K-12 Schools . . Interests of Faculty Members Toward Teaching, Research and Scholarly Writing, and Public Service . . . . . . . . Activities which Should Receive Load Credit for Public Service as Perceived by Faculty: Rank Order by Means . . . . . . . . . . . . Items which Should NOT Receive Load Credit as Perceived by Faculty Members: Rank Order by Means . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Committee Roles Perceived by Faculty as Should NOT Receive Load Credit for Public Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Activities in the "Undecided" Category as Perceived by Faculty Members . . . . . . . Items Isolated According to the Degree of Consensus and Response Strength . . . . Response of Faculty Members as to the Importance of Certain Factors in Influ- encing Their Decisions to Do Teaching, Research and Scholarly Writing, and Public Service, with Means and Standard Deviations . . . . . . . . . . . . viii 33 67 68 69 69 7O 72 77 82 85 86 99 109 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. Ranking of Institutionally-Sponsored Public Service Programs: by Mean and Standard Deviation . . . . . . . . . Percentage of Time Apportioned to Teaching, Research and Scholarly Writing, and Public Service: Assigned and Preferred . . . . . . . . . Perception of Faculty Members Regarding the Influence of Teaching, Research and Scholarly Writing, and Public Service on Decisions Regarding Promotion and Tenure: Assigned and Preferred . . . . . Perception of Faculty Members Regarding the Consistency of the Department's Practices and Its Stated Policy . . . . . Faculty's FUTURE Involvement in Teaching, Research and Scholarly Writing, and Public Service if the Present Policy Remains as It Is . . . . . . . . . . . . ix 111 113 115 117 118 LIST OF FIGURES Organizational chart of the administrative structure, College of Education, MSU . . . Scope of the knowledge base for the activi- ties of instructional development in higher education . . . . . . . . . . . . . A graphic representation of items isolated according to the degree of consensus and opinion strength: Department HPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A graphic representation of items isolated according to the degree of consensus and opinion strength: Department TE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A graphic representation of items isolated according to the degree of consensus and opinion strength: Department EAC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A graphic representation of items isolated according to the degree of consensus and Opinion strength: Department CEP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4O 42 95 96 97 98 CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Generally, the mission and goals of most public institutions of higher education (IHEs) reflect a commitment to Eching, research, and service. Teaching is clearly accepted as one of the roles of IHEs as is reflected in the strong commitment made by the institutions. This commitment to teaching is made based on the recognition that teaching contributes to individual growth which, in turn, leads to societal growth. Both individual and societal growth are interactive. Research (in most institutions, research, scholarly and creative writing are in one category) is a second goal of most IHEs. The research goal is based on the premise that society needs the new knowledge that can be best produced at a place where the scholars meet and where the facilitites for conducting research are available. Like teaching, the research mission is generally accepted at most IHEs. Service (usually referred to as “public service") .is also extolled as an important goal. Because IHEs are part of society and are often publicly supported, it becomes their reSponsibility to "discover practical uses for theoretical knowledge and to Speed the diffusion 1 of information to residents of the state, the nation, and the world" (MSU Mission Statement, 1982, p. 1). However, the public service role is less well understood and, hence, less well accepted. To summarize, the roles of IHEs are as follows: role as educator [teaching], role as creator of knowledge [research], role as provider of public service [service], and role as corporate member of the community (Carnegie Commission on Higher Education, 1972, p. 22). In the final analysis, however, the real meaning of each of these traditional roles is institution-specific and is best reflected in the faculty's activities and in the institution's reward system, work assignments, promotion, tenure and salary policies. The operational meaning of the institutional mission and goals can be reflected in the extent to which they shape the institution's faculty role expectations and, subsequently, the evaluations conducted by the institutions in evaluating faculty's performances. A review of the literature relating to the three goal areas reflects the uneven emphasis placed on the reSpective roles of teaching, research, and service by most IHEs. Much is written about teaching and research, but little, if any, emphasis is given to public service.” Teaching and research tend to balance out. Service, however, is short--poor1y conceptualized and erratically expressed. Not until these three bases of the profession are more nearly equal will the profession stabilize and straighten itself (Martin, 1977, p. vii). Such an under-emphasis on the concept of service can be traced to the issues summarized below. These issues lead to the basic problem for the study. 1. There is a general agreement on what is meant by teaching, even though the agreement may st0p short. of answering (questions regarding quality of teaching. There is a general agreement on what is meant by research and the types of research that ought to be pursued. However, where public service is concerned, there is very little agreement on what is meant by public service, how faculty should be assigned and how faculty ought to be recognized and rewarded for doing public service. It has not been studied, and faculty seldom raise the topic or request official guidelines about it. But administrations extol its importance and relate it to faculty responsibility and institutional accountability. So, in some undefined way, faculty are expected to devote a certain fraction of their work effort to what is vaguely called service--whatever it may be (Blackburn, 1974, p. 89). There are two plausible reasons why the problems associated with public service exist. universities fail to follow through what their mission statements. In other words, there exists incongruence between what is officially stated and what being practiced. is stated A second reason could be attributed One reason is that in an is to faculty's lack of understanding of their role in public service per se. appropriate What kinds of activities are seen as public service activities? What kinds of public service activities should faculty members undertake and be encouraged by the university concerned? If, indeed, public service is one of the missions of the university, then what are the institutional priorities for public service? How should faculty members be rewarded for carrying out. public service activities? These (are illustrative of the many questions which cannot be answered without having a clear definition of public service. The two reasons above are interrelated and often interactive. The way the institution defines its public service mission affects the way the faculty perceive and evaluate public service activities. Similarly, the faculty's role perceptions and expectations affect the directions and actions taken by the institution. If the faculty's service role perceptions and expectations are different from those defined by the institution, the resulting incongruence may persist indefinitely. Institutional Context of the Study On June 15, 1982, the Board of Trustees reaffirmed the mission statements of Michigan State University (MSU). This reaffirmation reflects the University's continuing commitment to the three roles of teaching, research, and public service, a commitment true to the land-grant philosophy. Basic to the land-grant concept is knowledge for use. As stated by James Lewis Morrill, '— . . the purpose of the state university is the threefold task of teaching, research, and public service; and in each of these three duties the emphasis has been on the usefulness and relevance of all learning to a better life and to the maintenance of a free and democratic society (Morrill, 1960, p. 12). As one of the major academic units of MSU, the College of Education retains its historical conunitment “to increase knowledge, to assist in the dissemination and application of knowledge in the public interest, to advance the learning of professional and lay persons alike" (Lezotte, 1982, p. l; MSU Mission Statement, 1982). In planning for public service activities, the various colleges in the university can start by referring to the university's descriptions which embody the framework of what constitutes public service and the criteria that can be deve10ped in judging the worth of future public service programs. 'The ‘mission describes public service as . . . a purposive, institutionally organized activity designed to deliver the University's Special competence to cmganizations, groups and individuals outside the University in order to assist and facilitate problem solving (MSU Mission Statement, 1982). Unfortunately, such a statement offers only broad guidelines. The interpretation of these statements and their translations into specific programs and projects is left largely to the various colleges and departments of the university. However, as Blackburn (1974) pointed out, a disconcerting fact is that there is no clear big understanding among most faculty members regarding what constitutes public service activities. Such a statement also applies to the faculty members in the College of Education at MSU. Recognizing the importance of the roles of faculty members in operationalizing the mission of a college in the university, the researcher pr0posed this study in an attempt to examine the perceptions Jafind belief patterns of faculty members in the College of Education toward public service. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study is to obtain a better understanding of the types of public service activities which faculty believe represent the public service mission. This study looks at faculty's perceptions of those activities which should or should NOT receive "load credit" for public service. "Load credit" here refers to faculty activities which are recognized by the department as a formal part of the faculty's duties and responsibilities for which s/he is paid by the institution. As explained by Bunnell (1960), "faculty workload for any professor can be defined as the summation of all the jobs assigned to that professor over a given period of time" (Bunnell, 1960, p. 8). A professor, for example, can be assigned to spend 50% of his/her working time to teaching, 25% to research and scholarly writing, and 25% to public service. The allocation of work load and the weight given in terms of load credit is "one of the mechanisms whereby the functional division is encouraged" (Trow, 1975, p. 50). Functional division here refers to the general division of the University's ndssions: teaching, research and scholarly writing, and public service. ‘There are, of course, other mechanisms such as the availability of funds and facilities conducive to public service activities and the structure of the reward system within the institutions (Trow, 1975, p. 50). In this study the focus on the weight given to an activity in terms of load credit is based on the assumption that the assignment of work load strongly determines the roles expected of a faculty member. Based on this study, guidelines and recommendations for the College of Education will be offered which will permit the College to take a more proactive stand rather than the current reactive position in public service activities. A. proactive commitment. is typified by an institutional sponsorship rather than individual faculty's efforts. The findings from this study could provide useful information for future directions to be taken by the College of Education at Michigan State University. Lastly, this study was closely tied to the historical commitment by the university and the College of Education to the missions of the land-grant institutions, guided by the land-grant philosophy which is committed to: 1. providing equal opportunity to all qualified applicants, 2. extending knowledge to all peOple in the state, 3. melding professional and technical instruction with quality liberal education, 4. expanding knowledge as an end in itself as well as on behalf of society, 5. emphasizing the application of information, and 6. contributing to the understanding and the solution of significant societal problems (MSU, Report to the NCATE, 1982, p. 1.2). The College is committed to ”assist in the dissemination and application of knowlege in the public interest." The public service role in the mission statement is seen by the researcher to be a potential vehicle to operationalize "the dissemination and application of knowledge." On that premise this study contended that the public service concept could be operationalized by the College of Education as a channel or vehicle in its dissemination efforts. It is hOped that this study offers an alternative view in looking at the concept of public service. Need for the Stggy This study was conducted on the following rationale. l. ‘géucitv of research in higher edgcation. In doing the literature search, the researcher found that, generally, the literature is sparce with regard to research in higher education. Sanford, in The American College (1962), noted the "paucity of research on higher education compared with studies of elementary and secondary school teaching." He also observed that . . most inquiries have been directed toward relatively superficial aspects of "how to do it" rather than toward attitudes, values and ways of conceiving the teacher's role and functions (quoted in Freedman, 1979, p. 5). The findings from this study could definitely contribute toward the enrichment of the literature in this area. 2. Need to establish fia clearer conceptual framework ofgppblic service. There is a general agreement in the literature that the faculty service role remains a subject that needs to be studied (Blackburn, 1974; Araghi, 1981; Long, 1977; Martin, 1977). Blackburn, in his article "The Meaning of Work in Academia," asserts that two kinds of research are needed on academic work. One probes the unknown of specific activities, such as variations in the service role; the other creates new conceptual schemes for understanding the whole and tests their framework against the empirical findings (p. 93). Araghi (1981), who did her dissertation study on the relationship among university faculty job satisfaction, role conflict, task clarity, and productivity, found that there was a positive relationship between task clarity and job satisfaction. Hence, it is vital that we obtain cflarifications with regard to public service since it is one of the roles expected of the faculty members. 10 3. Search for alternative research/knowledge disseminationflitiligtionjroqrarls. This research is also stimulated by the notion that the College of Education at Michigan State University bears the responsibility of not only being the producer of knowledge via research, but, more than that, is responsible for the transmittal/dissemination and application of those research findings--as stated in the University's mission statement. The gap between researchers and practitioners has been a big concern to federal institutions such as the Naitonal Institute of Education (NIE), which has funded several dissemination-related projects so that documentation of the process in bridging the gap could be done. The School Improvement Project in Detroit (1982-83) undertaken by the College of Education, Michigan State University, entitled "Research Dissemination Through Collaborative Planning for School Improvement,” is a good example of NIE's interests. The body of literature in dissemination seems to suggest that . . . at least in the field of education, assistance strategies using human helpers are effective for stimulating change at the local level and encouraging the use of knowledge to improve practice (Firestone & Wilson, 1983, p. 430). If, indeed, human helpers are "effective for stimulating change," then, perhaps, institutions of higher education have to examine their roles to provide that change so that 11 faculty members can be more directly involved in the process. Given the general tripartite functions of institutions of higher education, perhaps the public service role can be operationalized to bridge the gap between the researchers and the practitioners. It is possible for the public service role of MSU to be developed by the College of Education as an alternative model in research dissemination/utilization and effective school improvements. Relevance and Contribgtions to Educational Systems Development In the context of educational systems development (ESD), this study could impart some significant contributions. This section discusses the relevance and contributions of this study to ESD. An important area in ESD is concerned with dissemination/higher education culture and research utilization. This claim is further supported by leaders in the field such as .Joseph Durzo and Robert Diamond. Durzo (Durzo et al., 1979) have identified change/diffusion process and faculty/higher education culture to be a part of the scope of the knowledge base for the activities of instructional development in higher education. They also pointed out that in exploring the state-of-the-art in instructional development, . . a great deal of research has been conducted in the area of instructional development . . . concerned with instructional 12 design, design and use of nedia, and evaluation of programs, materials, and media (e.g., research on teaching-learning process) (p. 5). Research needs to pay attention to "the organization and administration of instructional. development and the develOpment process . . . " (p. 5). The scope of this study falls in the knowledge base mentioned by Durzo and, hence, will contribute to the much-needed inquiry in ESD. ESD is also basically an applied systems science. An ESD program with goals and purpose of ESD is seriously handicapped if that program is located in an institution which does not value service. An institutionalized, proactive service program will create a "laboratory" for graduates in ESD to have their field experiences. This study will contribute to ESD by providing data which will show where faculty stand in their perceptions of service. ESD program at MSU will be able to assess where it stands in relation to faculty's perceptions. This assessment might be crucial for ESD's future directions in the College. Research Qgestions This section presents the questions addressed in this study and the justifications for addressing those questions. The questions are as follows: 1. What kinds of activities are ‘perceived by the faculty members in the College of Education as appropriate for receiving load credit for public service? 13 At the moment, there is no study that looks directly into the aspects mentioned above. The question was posed in an attempt to obtain data which could clarify the role of faculty members in public service. In addition, these findings could help the decision-makers in the College to evaluate the present workload and the reward system in the College. 2. What differences are there in the perception and belief patterns of faculty members between departments in the College of Education toward public service? "Academic departments, by definition, are discipline- oriented rather than problem-centered” (Altbach, 1971, p. 53), and it is evidenced through the literature that academic departments differ in their focus because of this strong attachment to their respective disciplines (Altbach, 1971; Ebel, 1969). Given the four departments in the College of Education at MSU and assuming the different emphases, it would be significant to find out whether the findings from this study supported the generalizations made in the literature. 3. What are the various elements in the given activities which could serve to be part of the typology of public service? The elements for this question were to be derived from those activities which were perceived to be the ones which should receive load credit for public service. 4. Do the variables departmental affiliation, age, rank, years at present rank, experience in public schools, and 14 interests in public service activities make a significant difference in the way faculty perceived the various types of activities? It is assumed here that some of the variables selected can be the influencing factors in the way faculty members perceive public service. 5. What factors are considered by faculty members to be important in influencing their decisions to be involved in public service activities? This question attempted to find out the importance of various factors (extrinsic and intrinsic) in influencing faculty's decisions to be involved in public service activities. By knowing the importance of those factors as perceived by the faculty members, the College of Education would be able to offer institutional support and encouragement by reinforcing the important factors. 6. Given various characteristics of institutionally-sponsored public service programs, how do faculty members rank their importance? The characteristics of institutionally Sponsored public service programs were extrapolated from the MSU'S missions statements concerning public service (Lezotte, 1982). Institutionally sponsored public service programs are proactive rather than reactive in nature. Faculty's response to this question would reveal the importance of each of the various characteristics. 7. What are faculty's reactions when their future involvement in public service activities is projected in terms of work load time allocation and the reward system? 15 Work load time allocation determines the amount of time a faculty member is expected to spend on each of the reSpective roles of teaching, research and scholarly writing, and public service or on other activities. The current work load assignments may or may not be agreeable to faculty members. The question was aimed at finding out what work load assignments faculty would prefer in the future. Linked in) the faculty's roles is the reward system. Generally, according to the literature, among the three roles, research and scholarly writing has been given a heavier emphasis in assessing faculty for promotion and tenure (Lotto, 1979; McAllister, 1976; Altbach, 1971; Huber, 1969). The question aimed at finding out whether changes in the reward system in the future would affect faculty's decisions to be involved in public service activities. Assumptions and Limitations of the Study Assumptions This study was conducted based on several assumptions. 1. It was assumed that the researcher would have access to the documents and records necessary to answer some of the questions listed. 2. It was also assumed that teaching, research and scholarly writing, and public service were three separate and distinct roles, each with certain unique elements which described and defined each role. 16 3. In addition, it was also assumed that it was important that clarifications of the concept of public service be established for it could help the College in effectively Operationalizing the mission of MSU. 4. It was also regarded as important that the determination of the typology of public service be done based on common perceptions held by those who were expected to carry out the public service function, that is the faculty members. In lieu of the importance of the faculty's cooperation, it was assumed that the researcher would get their utmost cooperation and that those involved would give their careful considerations in reSponding to the study. Limitations This study was limited to the College of Education faculty defined as "regular" faculty in the MSU Faculty Handbook, 1981: The "regular faculty" of Michigan State University shall consist of all persons appointed under the rules of tenure and holding the rank of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or instructor, and persons appointed as librarians. In addition, the principal administrative officer of each major educational and research unit of the University shall be a member of the "regular faculty" (pp. II-13). Further limitation was imposed in this study by limiting the faculty to only the . . . academic faculty members (professors, associate professors, assistant professors, and instructors), and excluding librarians. and the principal administrative officers of each major educational and research unit in the College (adminstrators and departmental chairs). Another limitation was related to the fact that MSU is a land-grant university and, as such, the framework of 17 discussions in this study was limited to only land-grant universities. Further, it should be noted that generalizations made from the findings would only be restricted to the College of Education at Michigan State University. However, this would not mean that the implications could not be drawn or applicable to other colleges of education at other institutions of higher education with similar context. This study was also limited to the rather simplistic definition of public service as "those service activities which are worthy of load credit and does not include individual faculty service activities (e.g., consultation service) which are normally paid." The data for this study were collected at the end of winter term, 1983. If policy changes were made (e.g., departmental reorganizations or policy changes regarding teaching, research and scholarly writing, and public service) after that time, those changes would not be included in this study. However, if these new developments occurred, they would be noted. Definitions of Terms Some definitions of terms used in this study are presented below. These definitions are not exhaustive, but suffice to clarify their meanings for the purpose of this study. 18 Public Service The following definition appears in the MSU Mission Statement (1982) and will be used for this study. University public service is a purposive, institutionally-organized activity to deliver the University's special competence to organizations, groups, and individuals outside the University in order to assist and facilitate problem solving. University public service is fundamentally educative and advances the creation and application of knowledge through planned programs and activities. Academic Public Service This is defined as ". . . a programmatic relationship between university and community through which knowledge is brought to bear upon the resolution of public problems" Regular Faculty The "regular faculty" of Michigan State University shall consist of all persons appointed under the rules of tenure and holding the rank of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or instructor, and persons appointed as librarians. In addition, the principal administrative officer of each major educational and research unit of the University shall be a member of the "regular faculty" (MSU Faculty Handbook, 1982, pp. II-l3). Research and Scholarship A common definition is "any activities, other than teaching, which center on the develOpment, discovery, or dissemination of knowledge" (MSU Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education, 1981). 19 Another definition which is more detailed is offered by AECT (1977): "Research involves identifying problems establishing a rationale, deciding upon methodology, designing research activities and stating conclusions based upon the results" (p. 189). "There are several types of research, each with its own respective focus. These are applied research, basic research, descriptive research, experimental research, field research, and survey research" (p. 173). Teaching According to The International Encyclopedia of Higher Education (1977), teaching is "the process of helping learners acquire knowledge, Skills and appreciations by means of systematic instruction (Knowles, 1977, p. 536a). Load Credit This refers to faculty activities which are recognized by the department. as a formal part of the faculty's duties and responsibilities for which S/he is paid by the institution. Credit-Prodpcing Activities These are those activities in which the clients have to pay tuition or fees to participate and, subsequently, the clients will be rewarded either in terms of credits or degree. An example is courses which are offered on campus as a formal part of instruction are credit-producing. 20 Undecidedygateggry This is the third category on the five-point scale used for the card-sort instrument in this study. The category is one in which faculty members could not decide whether an activity should or Should p_o_3:_ receive load credit for public service. Organization of the Study This dissertation has five chapters. Chapter I describes in brief the statement of the problem, purpose, rationale of the study, questions postulated, assumptions and limitations of the study, and definitions of terms. Chapter II is a write-up of the review of literature pertinent to the study. Some of the themes covered are the literature on the state-of-the-art of public service (including past researches on public service), historical background of the development of public service, background of Michigan State University and the College of Education, and a brief section on the relationships between public service and Educational Systems Development. There is also a section on the issues of role theory and role expectations and their relevance to faculty behavior. The design of the study is discussed in Chapter III which includes the description of the research design, research population and sample, instrumentation, data collection procedures, and plan for data analysis. Discussed in Chapter IV are the reports of the research 21 findings. The summary of the findings, the conclusions, and the recommendations of the study are included in Chapter V. Summary Chapter I began by presenting a brief introduction of the study, followed by a discussion of the statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, and the need or rationale for the study. Several points were also discussed to suggest relevance to the field of Educational Systems Development. Questions addressed in the study were also presented, accompanied by some justifications for addressing those questions. Assumptions and limitations of this study were listed. Several relevant terms were defined and an organization of the study was also presented. Chapter II covers the review of literature pertinent to the study. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE The review of literature iS divided into the following sections: (a) public service: the state-of-the- art, (b) historical develoPment of public service in brief; (c) background: Michigan State University and the land grant movement; (d) public service and Educational Systems Deve10pment; and (e) role theory and role expectations: relevance to faculty behavior. Public Service: the State of the Art Over' the jyears, Since the 1862 land-grant Morrill Act, the public universities' programs in general have changed into many different forms in response to societal changes. By the same token, public service activities took varied forms, depending on how each university interprets what public service is. These various definitions of public service are reflected in the literature, indicating that there is no commonly accepted definition for public service. This section will explore the following aspects: (a) definitions of public service and (b) character of research on public service in higher education. 22 23 Definitions of Pablic Servigg A generalization could be made that there is an agreement among most American universities that their missionsconsist of the triad of teaching, research and scholarly writing, and public service. There also seems to be an understanding of what teaching and research are, but this understanding stops short when the issue of public service is brought into question. A cursory look into the literature is sufficient to confirm the susPicion that there are varied definitions of public service. Perhaps, here, then, is the consensus: Ellét the aonceLt of public service is not precisaly defined and, therefore, different institutions can view public service differently. The meanings attached to public service ranged from a broad one to more Specific definitions. 1\ broad definition views public service as those activities of the university which cannot be classified either as teaching or research or "simply as the residual activities that are left over after traditional instruction and research programs are accounted for“ (Long, 1977, p. 82). Another broad definition was offered by the Carnegie Commission on Higher .Education (1975) viewing service as ”advice and instruction to persons and organizations external to the campus” (p. 66). Still another broad definition was described in the International EncyclOpedia of Higher Education, but with 24 the added elements of "without compensation," "meeting community needs,” and "the activities being conducted on an individual or institutional basis.” Activities of college and university personnel, either in coordination or on an individual basis, aimed at aiding the public beyond the classroom teaching and scholarly research. Faculty may contribute special knowledge and Skills in helping to solve community problems and meeting community needs, as when members of a biology department serve on public boards or advise government agencies and citizen groups concerned with the environment. Usually such service is provided without compensation by the faculty or staff members working on their own time. Considered along with teaching and research as a primary program or goal of many colleges and universities (Knowles, 1977, p. 498-a). Another perSpective of public service views it as the "application of knowledge" (Davis, 1974; Perkins, 1966; Smith, 1982). To Perkins, knowledge is the soul of the existence of a university. Knowledge has to be acquired, transmitted, and applied. These three aSpects of knowledge are reflected in the three missions of the university: "the acquisition of knowledge is the mission of research, the transmission of knowledge is the mission of teaching, and the application of knowledge is the mission of public service" (Perkins, 1966, p. 10). Davis consented with Perkins, but added the dimensions of public service to be either at the departmental level (e.g., consulting, counseling) or at the institutional level (e.g., radio braodcasting, alumni reactions, and university publications). 25 In his dissertation, Smith (1982) added more elements in his definition of the term ”academic public service": The term denotes a programmatic relationship between the university and its community for the purpose of bringing the university knowledge resources more directly and effectively to bear upon the identification, understanding, and resolution of public problems. The programmatic relationship will exist between the college or university and community organizations or agencies, both public and private. University knowledge resources are delivered through programs of training, applied research, and technical assistance. Problems may be technical or related to policy in such areas of community concern as education, housing, human relations, energy, environment, government decision-making, and management, to name a few (p. 14). When extrapolated from the definition above, these elements emerged: programmatic; purposeful; identification, understanding, and resolution of society's problems; and knowledge-based. These are some elements which are part of the characteristics of institutionally- Sponsored public service programs included in this study. The application of knowledge view of public service is closely related to another meaning of public service which sees it as applied researgh. According to the Carnegie Commission, public service was initially viewed as research due to the ”demand for service to agriculture in the form of scientific research" (Carnegie, 1975, p. 69). In short, public service was expressed through scientific research and consultation and, consequently, was seen as research more than as service. It has also been suggested in the literature that teaching, research, 26 and public service be viewed not as conceptually distinctly different, but rather as "complementary phases of the same activity" (McAllister, 1976, p. 480). In his reconceptualization, McAllister suggests that we should conceptualize ”research as research, as service, as teaching; teaching as teaching, as service, as research; and service as service, as research, as teaching." Pere (1974) strikes the same note in his doctoral dissertation findings of a list of three activities identified as public service: Public service instruction: instruction for occupational and personal competence ‘Egblic servige research: research for public agencies Community service: community service consultation (p. 146). It is also not surprising to find public service being discussed in terms of gatension programs since the land grant concept first impacted agriculture in the form of agriculture extension prOgrams. Eddy (1957) Specifically labels the tripartite missions of the land grant universities to be instruction, research, and extension. In fact, he classifies the extension programs into (a) agricultural extension: brought results of research and new methods to farmers; and (b) university extension: brought classes to home, but did not solve problems related to occupation. However, Faiman and 27 Oliver (1972) did not find the term extension to be satisfactory. They preferred outreach [procram§: (a) educational activity; that is, bringing formal instruction to non-regular students; and (b) service activity: problem solving and program development in nature (p. 14). In brief, various definitions of public service abound in the literature. Public service has been defined broadly to be those activities not classified as teaching or research. On the other hand, there are also ‘more Specific definitions such as ”application of knowledge," "applied research," "public service as instruction, research, and service; extension programs; and outreach programs." It is obvious here that a clearer definition of public service needs to be developed. Charagter of Research on Paglia Service in Higher Education For the purpose of this study, the literature reviewed for this subsection will focus specifically on those studies most directly related to public service. In conducting a search for research on. public service in higher education, one is confronted head on, first of all, by the scarcity of research in higher education (Sanford, 1962; Blackburn, 1974; Peterson, 1974; Katzer, 1973) and dramatically more so in the areas of public service. The ones that are found are very diversified in their themes, making it difficult to extrapolate cohesive findings. 28 According to Peterson (1974), in an article in the Review of Researgh in Edacation, the major research issues in the 19605 were goals, governance mechanisms, protest activity, trustees, state coordinating agencies, emerging institutional forms, and community colleges; while the current emerging, researchable areas are "the impact of affirmative action, external degrees, collective bargaining (except faculty attitudes), and management systems" (p. 327). Peterson. pointed out that these research efforts have "few theoretically dominant themes or descriptive patterns that are widely generalizable” (p. 327). One of the tOpics researched was studying the profiles of institutional types. A research series on the t0pic was conducted under the auspices of the Carnegie Commission but the service fanction was not inclaggg (Peterson, 1974). Another broad area being researched relates to the faculty, examining issues such as faculty's choice of work or workload, productivity, job satisfaction and task clarity, faculty's attitudes, and faculty's characteristics and opinions (Katzer, 1973; Graybeal, 1979). Out. of the many researches being done on the faculty, several dissertation studies are directly related to public service. Katzer (1973) conducted "a study of attitudes of faculty members in selected community colleges toward community service." Another dissertation study was done by John Connolly in 1972 who found that: 29 l. the importance the institution placed on community service and in making tenure decisions influenced his commitment to community service, and 2. the idea of rewards for involvement was an influencing factor upon faculty concern for community service (Katzer, 1973, p. 25). Two other dissertations which dealt directly with public service and deserved to be mentioned were done by Murphy (1974) and Davis (1974). The former was an attempt . . . to identify and categorize the public service activities of faculty members of colleges and universities in Baltimore City and to ascertain from the faculty members their views as to their roles of higher education public service. Some of the broad categorizations of public service activities derived were public education, service to government, conununity participation, media, and business. The main disadvantage in these categorizations is that they are too broad to really allow us to reconceptualize public service. The dissertation study by Davis looks at how the Michigan state legislators view the public service function of the state-supported universities. Three conclusions established are worth mentioning here. 1. The public service function of universities is an apprOpriate function of state- supported universities. 2. Universities Should increase the amount of time Spent on university-Sponsored public services. 3. 1A public service option should be incorporated into the university procedures for faculty promotion, assessment, and professional advancement (Davis, 1974, pp. 114, 118). 30 From the review of the literature, several areas for potential research can be identified: 1. the need to have a clear picture of what public service is all about. Currently, there is little information available regarding public service in higher education (Murphy, 1974); 2. the need to look at conceptual inconsistencies/definitions of public service which vary widely. A typology of public service is essential. At the moment, few institutions have developed inventories of public service activities (Murphy, 1974; Finkelstein, 1980); 3. institutions of higher education need a well-formulated statement of policy concerning the rendering of public service (Citizens' Committee on Higher Education, 1965); and 4. little is known about faculty's attitudes and perceptions toward public service. Whatever is known is based on data from studies that bear indirectly on public service. Faculty represent the greatest resource in higher education; therefore, it is vital that their views regarding their roles are known. Historical DevelOQment of Paglia Service in Brief This section gives a brief account of the develOpment of public service in American universities. It is by no means an exhaustive historical review, but rather serves the purpose of highlighting some pertinent events to give uS some ideas of where public service stands within the historical context. It was mentioned earlier that the public service function of the universities deve10ped in America, thus 31 making it uniquely American in characteristics. There was a consensus in the literature that even though the status of public service was legally recognized with the enactment of the Morrill Act of 1862, the movement itself started in the 18408, a movement which was tied closely to the societal and intellectual changes in the American scene (Perkins, 1966). In the third quarter of the 19th century, the early American universities which held aloof of university-based research were impacted by the German universities, "transforming both the theory and practice of higher education" (Perkins, 1966, EL 10). This transformation resulted in the acceptance of research as a mission of universities (Perkins, 1966; Bok, 1982). Influence was also strong from England, where the Oxford and Cambridge models had strong emphasis on the undergraduate instruction. Under that influence, education was broadly conceptualized in terms of emotional, moral, and intellectual development, giving no ‘place for research activities. In short, there was unequal emphasis on the three missions of teaching, research, and public service. The German-modeled universities placed a heavy emphasis on research, neglecting teaching and jpublic service, while the English-modeled universities emphasized instruction, negating research and public service. Among the three missions, however, public service was the most neglected, having no place in either of the two models. 32 The idea of the application of knowledge for the betterment of the society toyed in the minds of leaders such as Franklin and Jefferson. It became a reality with the efforts of leaders like James Turner and Lewis Morrill. In 1862, the Morrill Land-Grant Act was signed by President Lincoln, giving birth to the concept of land grant universities. These are universities, developed on the land grant philoSOphy, which married features of the American, German, and British universities. Basically, they aimed at promoting ”. . . liberal and practical education of the industrial classes . . . knowledge for use and social action" (Morrill, 1960, p. 6). It was in these universities that the tripartite missions of teaching, research, and public service became established. The area first impacted was agriculture. Later efforts to bring research findings to the farmers became more organized, taking the form of agricultural extension programs. These efforts expanded into other areas such as home economics, the industries, and education. Over the years, the public service mission was interpreted and Operationalized into different programs depending on how the universities viewed public service and on how the universities reSponded to society's changing needs. There were centers for continuing education, educational television, and international programs, to name a few (Eddy, 1956). 33 Table 1 gives a summary of the various historical developments important to the understanding of the development of public service in the universities. This list was adapted from Davis in her 1974 dissertation. Table 1. Important Dates in the Development of Public Service in American Universities Date Event 1855 Governor of Michigan signs bill creating the nation's first agricultural college. 1857 Dedication of the Michigan Agricultural College by its first president, Joseph R. Williams. 1862 Morrill Act which set aside 17 million acres for land grant institutions whose teaching would include agriculture and mechanic arts. 1887 Hatch Act which furnished funds for agricultural extension stations and experimental work. This act provided the first federal support for research. 1890 Morrill College Endowment .Act; this additional endowment provided for cooperative extension and guaranteed that blacks would benefit from the endowment. (This was a separate but equal clause.) 1914 Smith-Lever Act; provided aid for home economics and agriculture instruction to persons not attending or in residence at colleges. This act was develOped in c00peration with the U. S. Department of Agriculture, and it was at this time that cooperative extension was given national recognition. 1916 National Defense Act; established military training in civilian schools and land grant colleges. 34 Table 1, continued Date Event 1917 Smith-Hughes .Act; provided for high school teacher preparation in agriculture and home economics and established aid for vocational education. 1925 Purnell Act; established monies for research studies relating to the rural home. 1935 Bankhead-Jones Act; provided additional sums of money for land grant education. 1962 Manpower Deve10pment and Training Act; Set aside federal funds for continuing education. 1964 Housing Act, Title VIII, provided for higher education training of Specialists in the area of community development and urban problems. 1964 Higher Education Act provided for the Administration of Community Services and Continuing Education Program. by the Office of Education. 1966 Adult Basic Education Act established additional funds for continuing education. Bacqugand: Michigan State University apd the Land Grant Movemaaa One cannot give an account of Michigan State University (MSU) without touching on the fundamental philosoPhy of the land grant concept, for both tepics are directly related to each other. This was reaffirmed by Eddy (1957) in his statement: One cannot, in fact, understand the past and present pattern of American higher education, or think intelligently about its future, without an understanding of the land grant institutions--of their place in the pattern and their influences on the rest of the pattern (p. xi). 35 Hence, in this section, an attempt is made to review the backgrounds of MSU within the context of the land grant setting. There will also be a subsection giving a brief account of the College of Education at MSU. This subsection is thought to be appropriate since this study specifically involved the faculty members in the College of Education. The Morrill. Act. was jpassed in 1862, giving birth legally to the land grant movement. Basically, the Act is '2 . . an Act donating public lands to the several states and territories which may provide colleges for the benefit of agriculture and the mechanic arts" (in Barikor, 1981). The Act Operates on the fundamental assumptions that the land grant philosophy believes in the democratization of education; i.e., . . . the equality of educational Opportunity at the university levels; provides a broad liberal education for students who are also interested in technical and professional training; and facilities for solving the significant problenw of society; and that. the university bears the responsibility to carry knowledge to the peOple (MSU, 1959, p. 2). The Land Grant Act could be accepted as the major contributing factor in establishing the public service function of land grant universities, thus creating a unique American identity in the scene of American higher education. Prior to that, the American universities were characterized by thatures of the German university model, 36 with heavy emphasis on research. The public service function was born in America and carried out by American universities, making it uniquely American. MSU was established in 1855 as the Michigan Agricultural College. It was one of the nation's first agricultural colleges, founded "to incorporate science and practice in the education of the farming and the industrial clases" (MSU, 1970, p. 1). In 1863 this institution was designated as the beneficiary of the Morrill Act endowment, making it one of the first land grant institutions in the nation. Even though the university's original mission was in the areas of agriculture and upchanic arts, its emphases have now expanded into other fields such as health, human relations, business, communication, education, government as well as urban and international settings. This expansion in its mission is a reflection of the sensitivity of MSU to society's changing needs. ‘This sensitivity is further reflected in the reaffirmation of the University's Mission Statement which was approved by its Board of Trustees on June 25, 1982: AS a respected research and teaching university, it is committed to intellectual leadership and to excellence in both developing new knowledge and conveying that knowledge to its students and to the public. And as a pioneer land grant institution, Michigan State University strives to discover practical uses for theoretical knowledge, and to speed the diffusion of information to residents of the State, the nation, and the world. In fostering both research and its application, this 37 university will continue to be a catalyst for positive intellectual, social, and technological change (MSU, Mission Statement, 1982). It is also expressed in the Mission Statement that MSU is committed to the three functions of teaching, research and Scholarly writing, and public service. Further, the University's public service mission statements describe public service as: .A purposive, institutionally organized activity designed to deliver the university's Special competence to organizations, groups, and individuals outside the University in order to assist and facilitate problem solving. University' public service is fundamentally educative and advances the creation and application of knowledge through planned programs and activities (Lezotte, 1982, p. 10). College of Education Germane to the establishment of the College of Education. at MSU' was the need for teacher preparation programs in Michigan. In 1905 the University's teacher preparation proqram in agriculture was officially approved as a degree program. Later, other programs such as home economics, teacher training, and teacher preparation programs in the sciences and arts for secondary schools were added. Teacher programs for the elementary began later, in the early 19405, but are now some of the largest programs in the University. I The College began as a department of education within the College of Science and Arts. Not until 1952 did it become the College of Education as it stands today. 38 According to the 1982 report prepared by the College to the National Council for the Accreditation of Teachers (NCATE), due to changed conditions shown by declining student enrollment and declining demand for teachers, the College had to orient its directions according to a long- range plan. It had to shift its emphasis from ”being one of the nation's leading producers of ‘professional personnel to that of becoming a leading producer and disseminator of sound educational knowledge" (M80, 1982, p. 2.2). However, training and retraining of education personnel both at the graduate and undergraduate levels were to be continued. To guide the development of the College, a special faculty task force prepared a report which was accepted by the College Assembly in the Spring of 1978, Spelling out several missions of the College. It was also made clear in the report to NCATE that . . . the College of Education is, as an academic and professional administrative unit, dedicated to serving society through (1) research; (2) functional relationship among research, development, and teaching; and (3) scholarly competency (MSU, 1982, p. 2.3). Structare of the College of Education. Since its inception, the administrative structure of the College has evolved over the years. The College now has four departments: (a) Administration and Curriculum; (b) Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education; (c) Health and Physical Education; and (d) 39 Teacher Education. The administrative structure of the College is graphically displayed in Figure 2. Relationships Between Public Service and Educational Systems Development The main focus of this section is to explore the relationships between public service and Educational Systems Deve10pment. It should be noted that the context of discussions is limited to higher education. It is found in the literature that just as there are varied definitions of public service, there are various definitions of Educational Systems Development. In fact, there are also various terms used interchangeably to mean ESD. Therefore, it is necessary to define what is meant by ESD in this section. As the researcher explores the literature, it becomes apparent that there is hardly any solid piece that discusses public service and ESD directly. It becomes necessary, therefore, for the researcher to extrapolate from the readings in an attempt to show the relationships. The correctness of this argument in this section is the reSponsibility of the researcher. The main source for the definition of ESD comes from the work of the Association of Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) and some leading scholars in the field (e.g., Durzo, Diamond, Gagne). In an effort to establish a common frame of reference, the AECT produced the Educational Technology Glossary (1977). The reader is 40 Assistant Assistant Assistant Assistant Dean for Dean for Dean for Dean for Teacher General Program Student Education Adminis- Develop— Personnel and Summer tration, ment and Programs Personnel, Service and Budget Programs Chairperson, Chairperson, Chairperson, Chairperson, Department Department Department Department of Adminis- of Counsel- of Teacher of Health tration and ing, Educa- Education and Physi- Curriculum tional cal Educa- Psychology, tion and Special Education Figure 1: Organizational chart of the administratiVe structure, College of Education, Michigan State University (NCATE Report, 1982). 41 encouraged to refer to the book for a better understanding of the ESD area. (It should be noted that the terms _e_d_uctional technology and ESQ are used to mean the same thing.) The following definition is arrived at by the Committee for Instructional Development, which is a subset of educational development: Instructional development: a systematic approach to the design, development, evaluation, and utilization of complete systems of instruction, including all appropriate components and a management pattern for using them; instructional develOpment is larger than instructional product deve10pment, which is concerned with only isolated ‘products, and is larger than instructional design, which is only one phase of instructional development (AECT, 1977, p. 172). Durzo, Diamond, and Doughty (1979) offer a somewhat simpler version of instructional deve10pment: ”Instructional development. is defined here as the systematic design, implementation, and evaluation of instruction (courses, programs, and curricula)" (p. 4). The importance of ESD is highlighted by the ESD program at Michigan State University which is quoted below: Our society now demands that changes in education occur at an increased rate in order to provide larger segments of our population with more knowledge and new skills. The "information gap” continues to widen and the "need to know” has become a crucial issue. A critical need continues for persons skilled in the processes of education and knowledgeable in their interpretation through educational technology-- systematic analysis, media design and production, program implementation, and evaluation processes (MSU, ESD brochure, 1983). 42 The main key that links public service and ESD is the fact that ESD is an applied systems science. Durzo, in higher education come 8 knowledge bases: 1. organization 2. instructional and from develOpment the following According to the sc0pe of instructional development activities four administration of instructional develOpment programs, develOper-client interaction, 3. instructional design process, and 4. evaluation. This is from Durzo. further indicated in the following process and figure taken --Hanagement --Supervision --Administration --Budgeting --Hission of agency or program --Change/innovation --Paculty/higher education culture --etCe --lD process --Consulting skills and techniques --Counseling techniques --Organizational de- ve10pment approaches --Process consultation --etC. --Learning theories --Educational psychology --Instructional design theories --Design of instruc- tional materials --Needs assessment --Content/task analysis --Design, selection, and use of media --etc. --zvaluation theory/models ;-PIOdUCt evaluation] validation --Faculty evaluation --Student ratings of instruction --Program evaluation --Cost-effectiveness evaluation --Testing/measurement --Research design and statistical analysis --Participant obser- --etc. l l l vation Organization and administration of ID programs Instructional develop- ment process and de— veloper client interac- tion Instructional design process Evaluation Figure 2. 1979, p. 5). \ <4 Practice of instructional development / Sc0pe of the knowledge base for the activities of instructional deve10pment in higher education (Durzo, 43 As indicated in the figure, one of the sub-areas in the organization and administration of instructional deve10pment programs deals with change/innovation process, which is one area that needs to be researched. Another relevant sub-area is related to the faculty and the higher education culture. If we were to refer to the section on the definitions of public service, we would find that a common element in all those definitions is "the application of knowledge." Accepting that element, and accepting the fact that a major feature of ESD is as an applied systems science, we can see that public service activities fall in the realm of ESD or vice-versa. Role Theory and Role Egpectations: Relevance to Faculty Behavior This section offers a brief review of role theory and role expectations in relation to their relevance to faculty behavior. Role perception studies cover various role concepts such as role conflict, role ambiguity, and role expectations. The review is limited to the concept of role expectations based on the view that the concept is most directly relevant to the study. In looking at the perceptions and belief patterns of faculty members toward public service, we were attempting to find out faculty's expectations of their roles in public service as reflected in the types of activities they chose to receive load credit. 44 In reviewing the literature relating to role theory, one finds a diffused body of literature covering various fields of knowledge. Biddle and Thomas (1966) and Biddle (1979) attributed this situation to the fact that there is a diffusion of the term role concepts with no solidified body of knowledge. The present body of knowledge encompassed broad areas such as occupational studies, deviancy, family, role playing as a technique used for training and therapy, and the processes of learning and socialization (Biddle & Thomas, 1966). Unfortunately, ”one cannot presently point to, display. or describe the body of knowledge in the field of role" (p. 14). What is role theory? "Role theory concerns the study of roles, or patterns of behavior, that are characteristic of persons and contexts" (Biddle, 1979, p. 20). The theory is based on several pr0positions, five of which are quoted below from Biddle. 1. Role theorists assert that ”some” behaviors are patterned and are characteristic of persons within contexts (i.e., form roles). 2. Roles are often associated with sets of persons who share a common identity (i.e., who constitute social positions). 3. Persons are often aware of roles, and to some extent roles are governed by the fact of their awareness (i.e., by expectations). 4. Roles persist, in part, because of their consequences (functions) and because the are often embedded within larger socia systems. 45 5. Persons must be taught roles (i.e., must be socialized) and may find either joy or sorrow in the performances thereof (p. 8). Our study is within the context of the five propositions above. Faculty members assumed certain behaviors which are patterned, up to a certain extent, within the context of educational setting. They not only function within their reSpective departments but also within the larger social systems of the university and the society at large. The mission and goals of the university influence strongly the activities of the family members. "A university is its faculty" or "the excellence of a university is the excellence of its faculty" (Smith, 1978, p. l) are among the double truisms often stated about universities. In assuming their roles as faculty members, the faculty' are socialized informally’ and formally' into their roles. An informal socialization could be their past experiences as graduate students in interacting with their professors. It could also be the unspoken norm placed upon them by their colleagues. A formal socialization could be the formal university faculty personnel policies. Hence, expectations of the faculty roles exist both on the part of the university and the faculty members. It is evident from the literature that one of the role concepts in role theory is role expectation, a construct which has been viewed in relation to behavior. DeVries (1972) sees role behavior (dependent variable) 46 largely as "a function of the role expectations (the central independent variable of other relevant findings)" (p. 4). In an attempt to overcome the lack of denotative clarity, Biddle and Thomas (1966) selected the following meanings of expectations in role theory: 1. a concept held about a behavior likely to be exhibited by a person, 2. a standard held for the behavior of a person, 3. an anticipation, 4. a norm, and 5. an attitude (p. 10). Taking this a step further, role expectation is defined as "expectations that are structured for the roles of positions within a social system” (Biddle, 1979, p. 394). In determining the varieties of specialization, some role thoughts designated most professors as nonexclusive generalists (Type IV) by virtue of their being part-time teachers, researchers, administrators, and providers of community services. This designation is made based on the amount of behavior engaged in and the number of differentiated behavior for a given domain of behavior (Biddle & Thomas, 1966). This differentiated involvement is a reflection of faculty's professional behavior. Numerous studies were done on this particular behavior but most were occupational studies (e.g., college professors studied as teachers, researchers, people of knowledge, and Fulbright fellowship recipients), studies on the 47 categorization of professional activities (Biddle & Thomas, 1966; Kohl, 1980) and faculty members' work load allocation. A study worth mentioning here as a case in point was conducted by Parsons and Plat (1968). They conducted an extensive pilot study of faculty in eight institutions, in which they analyzed the percentage of actual and ideal time allocations to five categories of professional activities. The two researchers concluded "that most faculty prefer a balance in their role expectations rather than specialization in any one role component" (Kohl, 1980, p. 28), with a strong commitment to teaching. Ladd (1979) reported parallel findings based on the data collected in the 1977 Ladd-Lipset survey. Ladd concluded that "most academics think of themselves as 'teachers' and 'professionals,‘ not as 'scholars,' 'scientists,‘ or 'intellectuals'--and they prefer it this way (p. 7). This preference existed even at the major research institutions. Studies related to faculty's professional behavior have explored other role concepts besides the ones mentioned above. Some looked into role conflict and ambiguity and how these were associated with job satisfaction and dysfunctional behavior. There were also studies examining specially the concept of role expectations and its relationships with a faculty's performance or behavior. An underlying fact to all this 48 is, that "individuals i1: complex organizations are constantly exposed to a variety of expectations from both themselves and others as they carry out their organizational roles" (Keller, 1975, p. 57). Writers such as Keller and Szilagyi (1977) credited Kahn with a theory of role dynamics. [The theory] sees stress as resulting from conflicting or incompatible expectations and unclear or vague expectations. Expectations which are in conflict may result in role conflict for the individual, while unclear or vague expectations may cause role ambiguity (Keller, 1975, p. 57). In a perception study, Bernard and Blackburn (1972) examined role conflict with respect to 17 faculty work activities. He concluded that the greatest level of role conflict experienced by faculty was with respect to self- set standard. In another perception study, Devries (1972) examined the relatinship of role expectations to faculty behavior. A conclusion made was that both role expectations of the employing organization predict positively and significantly the role behavior of the respondents. DeVries noted that the most salient factor is a faculty's own role expectations, pointing to an implication for further research which is similar to the conclusion made by Bernard and Blackburn. A. later' body' of research (Keller, 1975; Szilagyi, 1977; Araghi, 1981; and Kohl, 1980) indicates that employees are significantly more satisfied with their jobs 49 when expectations for performance are made clear and non- conflicting. An implication derived by Keller stated that: . . . effective personnel practices should,. therefore, strive to provide employees with role expectations that are clear and non-conflicting, and specific job behaviors that are needed to obtain such rewards as salary increases and promotions should be made clear (p. 63). Familiarization with the content of role expectations is also important in order to understand the relationships between role conflict and ambiguity and the different dimensions of job satisfaction. The pattern that emerged from the literature on the various aspects of role perceptions points to at least two research directions: 1. the importance of finding out the role expectations as defined by the faculty, based on the findings that self-set standard and faculty's own role expectations are strong factors influencing faculty's behavior; and 2. the implication that future research should determine the content of role expectations. In relation to the public service role, it is clear that we need to find out faculty's role expectations. A step in that direction is to find out how faculty perceive public service in terms of load credit appropriateness or worthiness. Summary The chapter contained the review of the literature, divided into the following sections: (a) public service: 50 the state of the art; background: (b) historical develOpment of public service; (c) Michigan State University and the College of Education: and (d) relationships between public service and Educational Systems Development; and (e) role theory and role expectations: relevance to faculty behavior. CHAPTER III DESIGN OF THE STUDY Introduction This chapter focuses on the research design and the procedures used to collect the data. Also included are descriptions of the population, the sampling procedure, the instruments used, and the plan for analyzing data. It should be noted that this study was designed to be a descriptive study, and, therefore, the research methodology chosen was meant to fit a descriptive study. As stated in Chapter I, one of the major purposes of this study was to obtain a better understanding of the types of public service activities. Several questions to be answered were thus formulated. 1. What kinds of activities are perceived by the faculty members in the College of Education as appropriate for receiving load credit for public service? 2. What differences are there in the perception and belief patterns of faculty members among departments in the College of Education toward public service? 3. What are the various elements in the given activities which could serve to be part of the typology of public service? 4. Do variables departmental affiliation, age, rank, years at present rank, experiences teaching in public schools, and interests in 51 52 public service activities make a significant difference in the way faculty perceive the various types of activities? 5. What factors are considered by faculty members to be important in influencing their decisions to be involved in public service activities? 6. Given various characteristics of institutionally-sponsored public service programs, how do faculty members rank their importance? 7. What are faculty's reactions when their future involvement in public service activities is projected in terms of work load time allocation and the reward system? Population gnd Sample Population The population in this study was the "regular faculty" in the four departments in the College of Education at Michigan State University (MSU). According to the MSU Faculty Handbook (1982), ”regular faculty" is defined as follows: The "regular faculty" of Michigan State University shall consist of all persons appointed under the rules of tenure and holding the rank of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, or instructor, and persons appointed as librarians. In addition, the principal administrative officer of each major educational and research unit of the University shall be a member of the "regular faculty" (pp. II-13). It has been mentioned in Chapter I, and needs to be reiterated here, that the population in this study DID NOT include those "persons appointed as librarians" or "the principal administrative officer of each major educational 53 and research unit" in the College. This exclusion narrowed the population only to those "regular faculty" who were ”appointed under the rules of tenure and holding the rank of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, and instructor.” One main important reason‘ for narrowing the population was the assumption that faculty and administrators, due to their differing roles, would tend to perceive differently. Since the study had to be conducted within. a very limited time frame, it became necessary to concentrate only on the academic faculty members. .A list of the target population was obtained from the dean's office. The list showed a total of 154 faculty appointed under the rules of tenure. These faculty members were from four departments: (a) Department of Health and Physical Education (HPE), (b) Department. of Teacher Education (TE), (c) Department of Administration and Curriculum (EAC), and (d) Department of Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education (CEP). Sampling To reduce the number of respondents to a manageable size and at the same time representative, a proportionate stratified random sampling was carried out. The strata in this case were the four departments in the College. The 54 decision to conduct such a sampling was based on two main reasons: 1. Data of "known precision are wanted for certain subdivisions of the population and, hence, it is advisable to treat each subdivision as a 'population' in its own right" (Cochran, 1963, p. 87). In this case the study was interested in comparing the findings among departments. The premise here was that departments are discipline-oriented and can exert great influence on the directions taken by faculty members in playing their roles. 2. Stratification may produce a gain in precision in the estimates of characteristics of the whole p0pulation (Cochran, 1963, p. 88). Based on preliminary meetings with the four department chairs in the College of Education, it was found that each department had its own orientations and focus in the planning of its activities. By stratifying the population into departmental levels, it might be possible to have a more internally homogeneous sub-population. In this particular case, there was no necessity to construct new strata simply because the existing departments became the "natural" strata. Sampling of the population was done taking into full consideration the "condition of equiprobability" and the "theory of stratified sampling.” The condition of equiprobability in the definition of random sampling states that at each stage in the sampling process all of 55 the remaining elements have the same probability of being chosen" (Glass & Stanley, 1970, p. 2L3). To fulfill that condition, the best method available was used and that was using the table of random numbers. ”The theory of stratified sampling deals with the properties of the estimates from a stratified sample with the best choice of the sample size tn, m3 obtain maximum precision” (Cochran, 1963, p. 88). To be as precise as possible, sampling fraction was calculated in order to obtain "stratification with proportional allocation of the nh” (p. 89). Based on that, 35% of the faculty was drawn from the population of each department. Ii total of 53 respondents were sampled and participated in the study. Instrgmentation Two instruments were developed by the researcher and used in this study: (a) questionnaire and (b) card-sort. Qpestionnaire The main purpose of the questionnaire was to elicit responses from. the faculty in the sample, in (order to obtain some background data on each respondent, plus to obtain data which could not be gathered through the card- sort instrument. The questionnaire was actually. a combination of faculty information gathering and opinion gathering. It was, in fact, a combination of a questionnaire and an opinionnaire (attitude scale was 56 used) (Best, 1977). For the sake of easy reporting of this study, only the term gpgstionngire is used. Most of the questions were to be responded to on a three or five point Likert scale (see Appendix A for the questionnaire). ‘The questions were developed after discussions with the dissertation director. Pilot test was conducted before the questionnaire was finalized to its present content and format. As a result of the test, several changes were made. The important ones were the general format of the questionnaire, wordings, and rearrangements of various questions. Card-Sort The second instrument developed was the card-sort or item-sort. Basically, it consisted of statements or descriptions of what were generally considered public service activities written on cards. The most influential idea germane for the develOpment of these cards came from the Q-sort method attributed to the work of William Stephenson (1953). Stated simply, the Q-sort method ”involves the sorting of statements written on cards into categories with statistical treatment of data to establish clusters of people with similar reSponse patterns" (p. 4). However, it should be underscored here that by no means was the instrument developed in this study meant to be used as the Q-sort because the conceptualization of this study was not appropriate for such a method. (Readers who are 57 interested in the Q-sort method are advised to refer to Stephenson, 1953; Block, 1978; and Cattel, 1952.) The main advantage of writing the statements on cards is that it allows for easy arrangement and rearrangement of the cards until the respondents reach their final decisions (Block, 1978). Unlike the questionnaire, the card-sort instrument was used to measure the perception of faculty members toward public service. Here, the faculty members were asked to sort the cards in response to the question, M of these pctivities do yojufi perceive to be the ones which should or shoglgy NOT receive load credit fgr Vppblig service? Load credit was defined as those faculty activities which are recognized by the department as a formal part of the faculty's duties and responsibilities for which he/she is paid by the institution. Those activities for which the faculty members receive payments (e.g., private consultation work) were not considered as load credit. Consequently, the statements printed on the cards were meant to describe activities which were generally practiced as public service activities by faculty members in the College of Education. In order to develop the statements, the researcher held several preliminary discussions with several relevant people in the College. The first step taken was to meet with the respective chairpersons of the four departments. The purpose of the meetings was to find out the respective 58 departmental formal statements and policies regarding public service as well as to try to discover the various activities described under the rubric of public service. The next step taken was to analyze Michigan State University's Mission Statement as well as the statements made by the College of Education on public service. Based on the analyses of the statements and the discussions held with the respective department chairs and the dissertation director, a group of public service classifications were develOped from two broad categories: Category A: Functional roles 1. external to the University 2. internal to the University Category B: Projects 1. one-shot project 2. on-going project Basically, Category A encompassed the various committees, internal and external to the University (Appendix B gives the complete classification matrix). There were three» committees internal to the Univesity: department, college, and university levels; while committees external to the university were two: professional; organizations and the statelfederal level. Each committee could either be standing or ad hoc in nature, and a faculty member could be either a member or a chair, either of which could be an elected or appointed 59 position. A total of 40 items or activities were derived (see Appendix B). Category B included projects which were classified into two types of projects: one-shot (one time projects) and on-going. To generate items or activities for both types of projects, four tree analyses were develOped (see Appendix C for illustrations of the tree analysis). A total of 32 items or activities were generated for Category B. There were altogether a total of 72 items for both Categories A and B (see Appendix D for a complete list of the items). Each of these items was typed on a 5x7" index card, with at least one example printed on the back of each card. Item numbers were randomly assigned to each card. It must be noted here that after pilot testing, the size of the cards was reduced to 3x5" for easier handling and sorting. Before data collection was really carried out, both the questionnaire and the cards were pilot tested. Ten faculty members in the College of Education, some of whom were not in the population (i.e., non-tenured) and some, although "regular,” were not in the sample were in the pilot test. The main purpose of the pilot test was concerned with content validity, that is, to see if the items (cards) were representative of the activities generally considered to be public service. Based on the feedback from the pilot test, several changes were made in both the questionnaire and the item cards, in format and 60 sentence constructions, so as to achieve clarity without bias and value judgment. Data Collection Procedures Minimal resources were required in the data collection procedures. Basically, the resources were limited to the printed questionnaire, one set of the 72 item cards which were typed on 3x5" index cards for easy handling, and a sorting file. In this study no mailing was required. An interpersonal, one-to-one approach was taken instead. 'This approach was chosen based on an anticipation of some possible procedural problems. One possible problem was the possibility of getting low response through mailing. Faculty members are busy peOple and are too (often bombarded by research questionnaires from other researchers. They may not feel they have the time to respond to yet another study. Another possible contributing factor was attributed to the sensitive topic dealt in this study. Currently, issues relating to public service are rather controversial, with some faculty members being pro-research, pro-service, or pro-teaching. To control the possible socio-psychological problems, the researcher decided to meet each faculty member personally to administer the questionnaire and the card-sort. - Appointments with each respondent were set up either personally or via telephone. Whenever possible, each respondent was given an abstract of the study as well as a 61 faculty consent form (see Appendix E) before he/she participated in the study. It was explained to the respondents explicitly both in the faculty consent form and verbally that the anonymity of the respondents would be safeguarded by only using codes in place of individual names and departments. The faculty were also informed that summary reports of the study would be available to those interested. Data collection began on the second week of March, 1983, and lasted through the middle of April, 1983. It should be noted here that data were collected during a period when the College was seriously considering a reorganization of its departments. Even though no changes took place during the data collection, changes might take place after the completion of this study. If that happened, this would mean that some faculty members would have moved from one department into another. Any future reanalysis of the data from this study must take any of those changes into account. Data were collected on an interpersonal basis. Each respondent was met personally. After a brief reminder as to the purpose of the study, the respondent was first given the questionnaire to be filled in. On average, that procedure took about 10 minutes. The next step required of the respondent was to respond to the card-sort. The respondents were given a few minutes to read the written instructions (see Appendix E). They were again informed 62 verbally that they were required to sort the cards in response to the following question: Whigh of thesg _activitigs do yougerceive to [E the onfi which shoju_1g receiyg' op_y§hppld NOT geceive load-credit for public service? It was underscored to the respondents that if items were sorted into Category 1 (definitely should NOT receive load-credit for public service) or Category 2 (probably should NOT receive load-credit for public service) that did pp; wean that those activities were to be excluded in the assessment of the faculty in the reward system. It simply meant that those activities should NOT be given load-credit for public service and perhaps should be considered as some other fitting activities for the faculty (e.g., teaching, miscellaneous activities, etc.). The sorting was to be done freely. There were no restrictions as to the number of cards to be placed in each category or to the number of times the cards were sorted. The respondents were allowed to change their decisions until they reached their final decisions. The only restriction imposed was that. only five' categories were given. These categories are displayed below. 63 Definitely Probably Undecided Probably Definitely should NOT should (neither should should receive NOT should receive receive load- receive receive load- load- credit load- nor credit credit for credit should for for public for NOT public public service public receive service service service load- credit for public service) On the average, the total time taken for the card- sorting was about 30 minutes. Thus, the average £9331. time for both the questionnaire and the card-sort was about 45 minutes. As a closure to the procedures, a brief Open-ended interview was conducted after the card-sorting. In the interview the respondents were asked to explain briefly the criteria they used to sort the cards and to give their impressions and feedback on both the questionnaire and the card-sort. The data collection ended in the middle of April, 1983. Plan for Analyzing Data Each of the responses in both the questionnaire and the card-sort were coded apprOpriately for computer analysis. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) computer program was used to analyze the data. Appropriate statistical treatments of data were chosen guided by the questions posed in the study. 64 The primary intent of this study was to find out the perceptions and belief patterns of faculty members in the College of Education toward public service. The main guiding purpose was to come up with the types of public service as viewed by the faculty members. Several questions were thus formulated and apprOpriate statistical analyses were conducted. Summary This descriptive study is aimed at finding the perceptions and belief patterns of faculty members in the College of Education at Michigan State University toward public service. The goal was to come up with a typology of public service. This chapter began by reviewing the research questions followed by discussions on the research population and the sampling procedures. Other topics presented were instrumentation, data collection procedures, and the plan for analyzing data. The next chapter will present the data analysis and the findings. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA Introdggtion This chapter includes the presentation and analyses of the data. The data are analyzed using the appropriate statistical analyses and are designed to answer the research questions originally posed in. Chapter I. Relevant discussions and appropriate tabular and graphic devices are included. The chapter begins with an overview of the research questions, followed by the data analysis for each reSpective question. nggview of the figsearch Qpestions The major question posed in this study is what are the perceptions and belief patterns of faculty Hammers in the College of Education, Michigan State University, toward public service. This question is linked to the major purpose of this study which is to get an understanding of the various types of public service. The main contention of this study is that public service can be viewed as an effective channel for research dissemination. 65 66 Seven research questions posed follow. 1. What kinds of activities are perceived by the faculty members in the College of Education as appropriate for receiving load credit for public service? 2. What differences are there in the perceptions and belief patterns of faculty members among departments in the College of Education toward public service? 3. What are the various elements in the given activities which could serve to be part of the typology of public service? 4. Do variables departmental affiliation, age, rank, years at present rank, experiences in public schools, and interests in public service activities make a difference in the way faculty perceived the various types of activities? 5. What factors are considered by faculty members to be important in influencing their decisions to be involved in public service activities? 6. Given various characteristics of institutionally-sponsored public service programs, how do faculty members rank their importance? 7. What are faculty's reactions when their future involvement in public service activities is projected in terms of work load, time allocation, and reward system? Findings Before data are 'presented for the respective questions posed, a description of the faculty sample will be presented. 67 Profile of the Sample A total of 53 "regular" faculty members were included in the sample. They were chosen based on a 35% proportionate stratified random sampling by departments. Table 2 displays the breakdown of the population and sample by departments. Table 2 Sample Population and Size by Departments: College of Education at MSU Percent Percent of Departments Population of Total Sample Total Counseling, Edu- 33 21.43 11 4.14 cational Psy- chology, and Special Educa- tion (CEP) Health and 30 19.48 10 6.49 Physical Educa- tion (HPE) Administration 46 29.87 16 10.39 and Curriculum (EAC) Teacher Educa- 45 29.22 16 10.39 tion (TE) TOTALS: N=154 100.0% N=53 34.41% Table 3 gives the breakdown of the sample by age. 68 Table 3 Profile of Faculty Members by Age Aqeyggtegories Number Percent 1. Over 50 29 54.7 2. 40 - 49 19 35.8 3. 30 - 39 5 9.4 TOTALS: 53 100.0 Table 3 shows that 54.7% of faculty members in the sample were over 50 years old (category 1), 35.8% were between 40 and 49 years of age (category 2), and only 9.4% were between 30 and 39 years old (category 3). None of the faculty members was below 30 years of age. The age profile runs parallel to faculty rank. Table 4 indicates that 69.8% of the sample were professors, 20.8% associate professors, and 9.4% indicated their rank as assistant professor. Table 5 gives the breakdown profile according to the number of years that faculty members were at their present ranks and the number of years at MSU. From the table, the findings show that more than half of the faculty in the sample, i.e., 59.8%, had been at MSU for at least 15 years. Only 11.3% indicated that they were at MSU from one to four years. As for the number of years at present rank, 11.3% showed they were in the category of over 20 69 Table 4 Profile of Faculty Members in the Sample by Rank Rank Number Percent 1. Professors 37 69.8 2. Associate professor 11 20.8 3. Assistant professor 5 9.4 TOTALS: 53 100.0 Table 5 Profile of Faculty Members in the College of Education by Number of Years at Present Rank and Number of Years at MSU At Present Egg; At MSU Number of Years Number Percent Number Percent Over 20 6 11.3 13 24.5 15 - 19 3 5.7 19 35.3 10 - 14 11 20.8 11 20.8 5 - 9 17 32.1 4 7.5 l - 4 15 28.3 6 11.3 Below 1 1 1,9 -- ---- TOTALS: 53 100.0 53 100.0 years. A larger percentage falls in the category of 10 to 14 years (20.8%), five to nine years (32.1%), and one to four years (28.3%). Only one person indicated being in the "below 1" category. 70 Faculty members were also asked whether they had experience teaching at K-12 schools before joining MSU as faculty members. Of 53 faculty members, 83.0% (44) indicated experience teachimg at K-12 schools as shown in Table 6. Faculty were also asked to indicate the level of school (elementary, middle, secondary) taught. They could, of course, indicate more than one level if they had taught at more than one level. (Therefore, note that the percentage and the number do not add up to 100% and 53 respectively.) Out of 44 who had indicated "yes" to teaching at K-12 schools, a high 60.4% (32) faculty members had experienced teaching at the secondary level. Likewise, out of 44, 45.3% (24) had taught at the middle schools. With respect to the elementary level, 41.5% (22) out of 44 faculty had taught at that level. Table 6 Experience in Teaching at K-12 Schools Yes No Number Percent Number -—Percent 44 83.0 9 17.0 Levels Taught at K-12 Schools Level of Yes Np School Number Percent Number Percent Elementary 22 41.5 31 58.5 Middle 24 45.3 29 54.7 Secondary 32 60.4 21 39.6 71 With regard to their academic qualifications, the findings show that the highest degree held was either the Ph.D. or the Ed.D. About 92.4% indicated one of those degrees. Only 7.5% of the sample indicated the Master's degree as the highest degree held. In the questionnaire, there was also a question regarding faculty members' working experiepces just PRIOR to joining MSU as a faculty membe . A large number of faculty (29) were either teachers, instructors, principals, or fellows. Nine faculty members indicated experiences in administrative positions. Other working experiences varied among the positions of research associates, psychologist, counselor, curriculum developer, project officer, consultant, military personnel, professional baseball player, and federal government employee. Only five indicated N9 professions prior to joining MSU as a faculty member. In an effort to explore the degree of interests toward public service, an appropriate question was related included in the questionnaire: To what extent would you like to do each of the following activities? a. teaching b. research and scholarly writing c. public service Table 7 illustrates the responses to the question. It is obvious from the table that a very high percentage 72 of faculty members has a very high interest toward teaching as compared to research and scholarly writing, or public service. 'The reSponses show that. 84.9% of the sample responded that they "would like to do teaching very much,” indicating a high interest toward teaching. Table 7 Interests of Faculty Members Toward Teaching, Research and Scholarly Writing, and Public Service ACTIVITIES Teaching Research Public Service Interests Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 1. Low 3 5.7 9 17.0 7 13.2 2. Moderate 5 9.4 20 37.7 17 32.1 3. High 45 84.9 24 45.3 29 54.7 TOTALS: 53 100.0 53 100.0 53 100.0 However, the pattern of responses for research and scholarly writing was rather Spread out between ”like moderately" and "like very mmch." The table reveals that 45.3% "would like to do research very much" and 37.7% "like moderately." In public service activities, 54.7% of the sample responded that they "would like very much" to do public service, while 32.1% ”like moderately." Only 13.2% indicated a low interests toward performing public 73 service activities. From this figure, it seems that there was a high interest among faculty members to be involved in public service activities. Resplts for Researchngestions This section presents a report of the findings for the respective research questions posed in this study. As mentioned in the preceding chapter (III), the source of data to answer questions one through four came from the second part of the data collection, measured by the card- sort instrument. It was also pointed out that there were 72 items in the card-sort, each randomly numbered. The cards were presented to the subjects in a random order. These cards were sorted by the respondents on a scale of one to five, with one labeled as ”definitely should N911: receive load credit for public service," three labeled as the "undecided" category, and five labeled as "definitely should receive load credit for public service." Question 1: What kinds of activities are perceived by faculty members in the College of Education as appropriate for receiving load gredit for public service? Based on the findings, the items selected as appropriate for receiving load credit were all those with means above 3.5. Those items with means between 2.5 and 3.5 were categorized as "undecided," that is, those items for which faculty could not really decide whether to give 74 or not to give load credit. Items with means below 2.5 were those perceived as "no load credit.” Such divisions were made based on a simple rationale. The items were measured on a scale of one to five, with four units of interval. This scale was to be divided into three categories: load credit, undecided, and no load credit, each representing approximately one-third of the interval in the continuum. Note, however, that even though the tables included means and standard deviations, the findings for question one are discussed using only the means. The standard deviations generally ranged from 0.32 to 1.5 indicating small variances in the responses. The standard deviations are included to give the readers a more complete picture of the findings. Further, the standard deviations are used in making the consensus charts in the discussions of the findings for question two. Following the divisions above, the responses to this question are displayed in three tables respectively: Table 8 (load-credit items), Table 9 (no load-credit items), and Table 10 (undecided items). Table 8 presents the rank order listing of those items or activities which had means above 3.5, that is, those activities perceived as the ones which should receive load credit for public service. Note that the higher the mean, the higher is the ranking for a particular item/activity, since five was the scale for "definitely should receive load credit for 75 public service." From the table, it is clear that all those items/activities which should receive load credit for public service as jperceived by the faculty in the study had means ranging from the lowest 3.51 to the highest 4.89, yielding a total of 21 items. That accounts for 29.2% of the 72 activities. All activities described as "on-going" projects and having elements such as "university sponsored" with "payment going to the university" were perceived to be highly deserving of load credit. The mean score for these items was above 4.5. Other activities with means between 4.5 and 3.5 were classified as "on-going“ projects and were described as "non-credit. producing," with "faculty volunteering their time" and "will NOT be paid," irrespective of whether the requests came from the department chair/dean or directly from members of the client institutions (private and public). Similarly, pl; on-going projects which were described as predit prodgcing (refer to "Definition of Terms" in Chapter I for definition) were also given load credit, again regardless of whether the source of requests came from private or public institutions. Table 8 also indicates that §l_1 activities described as ”one shot" activity, "non-credit producing," "Sponsored by the university," and, consequently, "payment goes to the university" were also given load credit. Neither the department chair/dean nor the nature of the client 76 institutions (public or private) made a difference in the response for this group of "one-shot" activity items. There is a difference, however, with "one shot" gregit prodgcing activity, with the source of request coming from the department chair or dean and the client institutions described as public. This item had a mean of 3.53, thus falling into the category of load credit. (All other "one-shot" activity items were perceived to be in the other two categories: "undecided" and "no load credit," as determined by their means.) Thus, it seems that for items described as "one-shot" activities, the source of request which came from the department chair/dean plus the nature of the client institutions which was "public" were taken into consideration by the respondents in their sorting of the items. With regard to the functional roles or the committee membership roles, those perceived as deserving load credit were as follows: 1. gppointed ghair of a standing committee at the state/federal level (mean = 3.91), 2. elected chair of a standing committee at the statelfederal level (mean = 3.91), 3. gppointed chair of an ad hoc committee at the staterederal level (mean = 3.64), and 4. appointed chair of a standing university committee (mean = 3.51). There was a general agreement that to be a chair of a standing committee at the state/federal level was an activity which should receive load credit for public '77 .osua on so: HAL: 50» .oaau usoa muuazbqo> cu pooume use: so» .cowusumuecq cannon e as ozHUDoomm anommuuzoz on nouns .huuuue>ucs 0:» Cu coco ucwsxmm .nBeEmOLQ ucoaosoumam acacom ..m.u. .oeHOmcomu muuuuo>ucs nu nuanced och uuonoum uquOOuzo. co unaccoo o» coouoo use: so» .zeuo uo mucmo .ozHoaaomm snowmouzoz ma sums: Hzgfimms sou .couusuuuucm ue<>Hmm mH.H om.v «uoofloua.uucfiomnconfi hm e uo «warm: e an sunbeam e co . . AonwOEQ, u:~ou::0n« on .oaum on 902 Add: :0» .oaaa no a so 4 . use» cumhzaqo> cu assume o>ec sou huauue>ucn ecu 0» «00m acoaamm .eowusuuuucm us<>nmm .puLOmcomw auuuuo>ucs a“ nuanced och d an UZHUDQOfih BHOMflUIZOZ mm sows: AuEmLmODQ mewcmmuu ..m.o. .quuaaomm amoumUIZOZ mu cums) unencum .quoo|zo. ce unaccoo 0» .AuEmumoum ucoEo90umEW Hoonom ..o.o. vacuum use: so» .zus sow .coausuaumca enamom a we swarm: a sh awesome a co oo.~ om.v awooflOCQ uuc«OMIcoufi a cw.o ~h.c AMUOwOuQ nUCwowtcouu nv .auuuuo>mcs on» O» moon ucoE%ma .peLOmcomm muumuosuc: a“ noofioum och .wuumuosmcs ecu 0» «wow acoeaem .pouomcomm auwmuosmcs um uoonoum one .coausuauucq ne<>amm a an .ozaoaoomm snowmouzoz as . .coausuauuca nuance a some: AmEeHmOLQ ocucueuu ..m.o. ue .quuaoomm anomxulzoz a“ scan: uoun0uo .ozaoonzo. no unaccoo 0» .aasnumoud acmeo>0udea accrue ..m.o. oooume o>ez so» .z2 umpuo xcmm "xpasomm an pm>flmoumm mm oofl>umm oaandm MOM DHCOHU Umoq m>fiwomm pasonm £0fi£3 mmflufl>fluo< m canoe '78 .uzuoaoozm enammo nu nous: AnaeumOEQ acucueuu ..m.o. unencum .UZHOOIzo- cm uospcou Ou pooume «on; 90» .eouusuuumcu ue<>uam a no «main: a an emmsome . co uuomwoua..mcuomtco.% .huueuo>uc= ecu Ou noom uc0flaem .poHOmcomu huueuosucs nu unencun och .ozuosoomm aunmmoazoz nu sous: .caosu Ixuos hep eco ..m.o. uau>nao< .aomm-uzo. a unaccoo a» cannon oeec sou .couusuuuucu cannon - «a «worn: a an «museum - co Auwu>uuomwuu0cmuocoufi .o..a on no: Hus: 50» .osuu sac» zmmpzsqo> a» vegan. sou .UZHUDDOmm Buommuuzoz mu coucs .cnsuumocm ucoeo>ouasu HOOcom ..m.o. uoofloum uUZHOOuzo. cm uospcoo Ou pooumm o>ec so» .comusuuumcu oucmpm a uo amaze: a so someone a co AMUoflouairucmouucouq .huumuo>ucz ecu cu wwom ucoexmm .pouomcoam uuumuo>uco mm unencum och .comusucumcm Undmbm e um Dznoaoomm anommUIzoz nu coucs AQOcmxuos amp oco ..w.o. auu>uuoa .aommnmzo. a unaccoo cu pooume o>mc so» .zucs ecu cu meow ucoshum .oouOmcoam huuuuesucs nu unencum och .cousuuuucu maesumm a us ozuoaoomm suauzouzoz nu cuucs Amocuxuos amp oco ..m.o. suusuuoa .aomm-uzo. - uusocou ou voodoo esec sou .zcwo no macro azmzamumm e um ozuoooozm auamxo nu cocci unseumoum ocucmeuu ..m.o. uoonoum .ozHOOIzo- ce unaccou cu voodoo o>ec so» .zcmo uo ¢~<=U azmxszoumEu floccom ..m.e. uoonoum suzuoo-zon cu uospcoo Ou pooumm osmc so» .zcmo uo macaw azmzemeamo :6» so $305. a co m~.v Aww0fi0um\uucuomlconc '79 mEmum MN .oouquEoo suumua>uc= ozuozchm o no zommmm umucmo ouhzuomm< smog use: so» om.~ Hm.m couch HecuouQMfi .couusuuuwcu Unambm e um UZHUDOOmm hmammu mu comcs .QOcmxuos hop oco ..m.o. suupuuoa .aomm-uzo. a unsccou ou vacuum use: so» .ztmo no ~H.ou nooumo sou .02nuaoomm aunnzu.zoz as nous: .aaoumOum acucueuu ..u.o. uoonOun canoe :20 cu unaccoo Ou peoume usec so» .couuauuuucu uh<>umm a we amaze: a an awesome a co «uoofloun aucuouncoufi .Hosou Heuopou\eueuu ecu us oeuuuesou vow n< an no flu‘lU OthHOA t anon o>mc so» _«~0u nachoumWH .uo>uu uezmnmm\uhwc= ecu cu doom ucoexmm .poHOmcomm hummuopucs mu uoomOCQ och .UZHUDQOKA huammo-zoz mu sous: .docm Ixuos hep oco ..m.o. huueuuom uhomm uzon e uospcoo Ou peeume spec so» .comusuuuucu mh<>Hmm e we gamma: a an hmmaomm a co duuubuuom .uOchecoufi .He>on Heuopeu\oueue ecu us oouuuaaoo uzuozchm e we ¢H¢NU DNFZHommt coon Ohmn 90» uwuou aucuoummw mm vn vv am on 80 service. However, it seems that the term appointed carried a heavier weight in the decision making as is evident from the mean in the list above. Number 3, for example, was an AD HOC committee, but the chair was APPOINTED. This item fell in the load credit category. On the other hand, state/federal level ad hoc committee with ELECTED chair was grouped into the I'undecided" category (see Table 10). Note, too, that the role in the four committees above was the chairpersonship role and that the committees functioned external to the university. Only ppg internal committee role was given load credit and that was the appointed chair of a standing university committee. Obviously, in this case, the elements of appointed, ppgjg, and standing carried weight in the decision making by the respondents. Even though question 1 above asked only for those activities seen as appropriate for receiving load credit, it is also considered equally important to discuss the findings of those activities categorized as "should NOT receive load credit for public service" and those which had been sorted into the "undecided" category. Therefore, findings of those two categories are also presented here. W Table 9 displays the findings of those activities seen as not appropriate for receiving load credit. The table shows a total of 16 items in this category, which is 81 about 22.2% of the 72 items sorted. It should be noted here, too, that on the five point scale, 1 was the category "definitely should NOT receive load credit for public service." Hence, for the data in Table 9, an inverse ranking takes place. The 133;; the mean, the higher is the rank accorded to the item/activity. The means, as displayed in the table, range from 1.77 to 2.47. From the array of data in Table 9, a general profile of the activities can be established. 15;; activities described as "one-shot" or "on-going" activities in which the faculty involved ”received payment" for their services from the client institutions were all chosen (N92 to receive load credit for public service. The source of reguest for the service (department chair/dean or directly from members of the client institutions), the nature of the client institutions (private or public), or the 929; credit pppducing nature of the project did not seem to be distinguishing factors. Note, for example, that even the non-credit producing items were given load credit (as shown in Table 8), but there was no payment to the facgltv involved. However, in Table 9, those activities involving the faculty, though non-credit producing, received payment from the client institutions. It is clear that direct payment to the faculty from the client institutions was the ggciginq fggtor in the sorting of the items. It is an imppgggnt fgctor to consider in the policy decision making for public service. €32 .oeuuuesoo HeucoEuummop oo: a< no we houses omhzuomm< coon use: sch .couusuuuecu auucsm ecu an cues on uuus so» cm.~ HH.N AuHOu Hmcuwucmfi v .UZHUDOOKQ haDflKUlzoz .comuouuumcm ouacsm nu caucs anocnxuos hecuoco on» an ones on uuu: so» ..o.u. suusuuoa .aoum-uzo. .COwusuuumCm Uuqmbm a an .ozuoaooma snowmouzoz mu noun: a unaccoo cu panama ean... Anacmxuoa hep oco ..m.u. hum 90h .couusuuuncu Uncnbm e Ibuuom shesm uzo- e unspcoo Ou no «Hutu: a ha hmMDOmu a co vkumm o>mc 90% .24ma no mutmu .II hzmzhm Us Auwu cu uuocu anon. on .couuauuuocu eue>uum on» an cums on uuua 90» .couusuuumcu oueeuum ecu an pace on uuus sou .ozuooaomm auauxoazoz nu coucs .mEmHmOHQ oeucueuu .couuauuuncu uh<>umm e um ..o.u. unencum .ozuoonzo. .ozuooaomm auamaouzoz mu coca: en unaccou cu cooumn use: Anocmxuos asp eco ..m.o. huu so» .couusuuuucu mh<>~¢m e upuuua .aomm-mzo. a unaccoo ou no «not»: a an awesome a :o pooume «sec 90% .zcmo no «menu azmxameaua uses an ammsomm a co o~.u on.~ uwmowoua .ucuouico.. an av.H oo.~ «Numbuuue succwuocohfi ha .couusuuumcu eumpuua ecu ac ones on ”use no» .couusuuumcu Duaczm ocu ac n~uc Announced ucosesoumau acacou you .couusuuuucu wh¢>nmm e ..o.u. uoafioum .ezuoonzo. uo amaze: a an panacea a co co uospcou cu voodoo e>nc nos .cosusuuuucu oasmsa a h~.u pp.u uuuusuuuo .uonm-uco.. No no swarm: a an awesome a co «mam can: nouuusuuu< cones: om.u vm.u uuoonoua .ucuoucco.c a sou" memo: ac umpuo xcmm umHmQEmz xuasomm >3 pm>flmoumm mm uflpmuu Umoq O>Hmomm hoz pasocm cOHc3 mEouH m magma 823 om.H vn.~ alouu oH .oouuuaeoo unucosuuuduo ozuozmc 50» me.“ uwuo. uncuuucuc .oeuuueeoo Heucoauuemop no: at an no mucuu cuhomcu eooc eeec so» mv.~ AwHOH «mcuoucufi “AthOh mm hN mN mm.H mv.N nv.H nv.~ mN.H mN.N Hm.H mN.N 0N.H aH.N ov.u 5H.N .oouuuelou auumuo>ucs 00m o< as no mmmzmt awhumqu coon o>mc 50% uwuoa HassoumM% .eouuueeoo Housmauuamuc ozuozcam a do amaze: assuage econ can: so» AuHOu Hmeuoucnu .oouuueeoo omouuoo now a: no no mania: nmhomau coon oemc 90% AflaOu HecuoucH. oflOdu—uuuumn; ouapuum ecu an auumm e um ozuoaoomm huomxouzoz nu noun: .mEeHmOum mcmcueuu ..m.o. uoon nous .ozuoouzo. an unsecoo 0» vacuum esmc so» .zcmn no ¢H<=U azmzhmeamn use» an summon: a co uwooHOun cucuou-:o.e .oouuuaeoo HeucoEuummmp no: 94 no no necsos nmhuuan couc oeec 90h AwHOH Hecuoucmq. .couusuuumcu ouunsa ocu an cues on Hus: 50» .couu I:u«um:« Unambm e um UZHUDQOGQ hunumUuzoz nu sous) .usauooum ucososoasu deacon .66. uoofl naum guanoeuzo. :e unaccoo Ou voodoo osec so» .zcmn uo cacao Sushi—Ema 26» an $305. a co uwoefi0um.uucuoulcoo_ MN cm mm. Hm av 84 To examine the functional roles or the committee roles, a separate table (Table 10) is further developed from Table 9. Table 10 gives the listing of the committe roles rank-ordered according to their means. There were eight items in this category, with means ranging from 2.11 to 2.47. Considering the five-point scale used, the means indicated that the faculty sorted the items generally around scale 2; i.e., "probably should NOT receive load credit for public service"; and scale 3; i.e., "undecided" category; There was a general agreement that members (elected or appointed) for ad hoc or standing departmental committees should NOT receive lgad crgglt for public service. This picture concurred with the statements made by respondents in the open-ended interview. Generally, the respondents stated that serving as committee members at the departmental level was part of being a professor. . The role of elected chglg of an ad hoc departmental committee was also selected to be in the no loa_d credit category. Undecided Table 11 gives the list of items in the ”undecided" category. In this category, faculty could not decide whether to sort the items into the no load credit or the load credit categories. On a five point scale, 3 was labeled as the "undecided" category. For the data analysis, the cut off points were between 3.5 and 2.5. On 85 Table 10 Committee Roles Perceived by Faculty as Should NOT Receive Load Credit for Public Service Activities Mean S.D. l. appointed member, ad hoc 2.11 1.30 departmental committee 2. elected member, ad hoc 2.19 1.26 departmental committee 3. elected member, standing 2.43 1.42 departmental committee 4. appointed member, standing 2.47 1.50 departmental committee 5. elected chair, ad hoc 2.45 1.41 departmental committee 6. elected member, ad hoc 2.28 1.25 college committee 7. appointed member, ad hoc 2.45 1.34 college committee 8. elected member, ad hoc 2.45 1.38 university committee the whole the means in this category ranged from 2.60 to 3.45, while the standard deviation ranged from 1.34 to 1.66. The closer the mean is to 3.00, the higher the ranking is given. A total of 35 items or 48.61% were in the undecided category. Out of that, an overwhelming 28 items were the committee roles. These results confirmed the observations made by the researcher as the study progressed that most faculty members were rather undecided in their sorting of £36 mm.H Hm.~ om.H om.d vn.A nv.a mo.~ ma.m na.m Ha.N Ha.~ no.~ va.N .comumNucemuo decoummuuoum e uo mouuuesou 00: 04 an we Kudzu awthoaac coon osoc sch duHOC Hecuuuxmu .ouuuuesou hummuuaucs 00m 04 as no Mntmu GNhZHOAmd Gwen Dunc 50% AwHOE Hecuuucnu .eouuueeou muumaopuca uzuaz om.H mo.n AwHOu Hecuouxnm .Hepoa Heuovuu\uueum onu um omuuaaeou uoa a: an ac mmmtm! DMhZHOmmt c003 090‘ 90% on.d mo.m dudou unauouxuq .oeuuuesou muuuaosua: quaz ou vacuum «so; so» .ozuuaaoma huamxuuzoz nu coucs caucaxuos hep eco ..m.e. huueuuue ohoamnuzo- e uuopcoo Ou ooeume «so: so» .aouuauuunau uuaaaa a uo mania: a an season: a no vo.H no.n Auuubuuue succuloco-u on.“ :00: Iflmuubufiofi nu ma av mm Cu nonfial leun muucEmz Nuasumm Nc pm>fluuuum mm mufluommumu =uupfluwuca= ucu ca mmfiufl>fiuu< HH manmh 537 nm.# av.H vm.H vn.m oo.H cm.n mN.n ow.~ os.~ MN.M .UZHUDOOKH huommu aw coucs Amocmxuoa amp oco ..u.o. auubuuue nhomwuuzo- e unaccoo Ou voodoo ass: 90» .couuauauca uuaaaa a no cause: a an panache a co uuuusauum..uosmnucouq .Heboa unaccou\uueum ecu an vouquEOO U2H02as no» AuHOH Hecuoucnu .comueuucemao Accoummoanm e we oeuuuesou no: 94 an no «not»: ouhunun ceoc 0sec :0» Adda» necuouxu. aua>uuoo .AOmmumzo. a uosacoo as common o>mc 50> .24mo no mHoH Heaopou\oueuu ecu ue eouuuaaoo 00: ac as HO mnde Dmhomqm c000 Ohm: 50» AuHOu dmcuuunum .oouuuesou omuHHou uom ac an we «memo outhommc cooc esec 90» AUHOu Hecuoucau .couuesucmmuo uncoummouOum e u0 oeuuueeou 02H024hm a No «Norm: omhomqu ceoc usec so» av.H mc.~ deuce aecuouxmu .oaoa on 962 uua: so» .ueau usOh mmuhzaqo> cu assume no» .UzHUDoomm huom¢0|zoz eu coucs «mocmxuos hepuuco eon-UV %&w>d805 ISIWINZOI e uuspaoo cu peoume esec no» .couusuuuocu ua¢>uxa a an amaze: a an humans: a co om.a no.~ diamouuoe suocmlocowfi an F. mm mm Nv hm 853 hn.H nv.H mm.H nm.u co.N oo.N v>.N vb.N hp.N 05.N .eouuuesou amounou com at as uo «menu nuhumcu coon esec sch AwwOu Hecueucnu .00uuueaou huuuuoauca 00m o< as we mania: OMhZHOmm< coon abec 50% AMHOu Hecueucnc .cOuueNucemuo decounuoLOum e no oouuuesoo 00m :4 an we “not”: anthoamd coon eeec 90» —e~0u Hecuommmfi .oouuuesou amouuoo ozua2uca ozaaznc sow duHou unauuucmfi .oouuaesoo ommuuoo ozaazaam a «o mmmzmz nmhomqm couc o>mc 50» AuHOu Hecuoucwm .co«ueuucmmao accommmouOHQ e no euuumesou no: 94 an we ancmu nmhomcn cooc e>ec 90» AwHOu uecuouuuh mm ad on mm mm ma he om.a vc.d vc.H vu.d .quuoaoam auaamu nu nous: .aosmxuo: hep oco ..m.o. huusuuue ahommnuzo. e unaccou Ou pooume «Dec 50% .co«uauuuucu uh<>nzm - uo amaze: a ma amazon: a co on.n uuuapauuw .uonuuuco.. .Heson Hemopou\oueue ecu an flouuuafioo 92an 0» caucus sou .couusuuuecu Unqnbm e um Glauaoomm haOflflUlzoz ea cuucs Amocexuos use see ..o.e. .eeuuusloo umucusuaeaop uom at an we mucmu nmthommd coon 09m: 90h vo.~ .eHou Hucuoucnu .cuem 0c ho: Hum: 90» .oauu uaOh muuh2pco> Ou voodoo spec so» .couuauuuucu flh<>Hmm a an UZHUDoomm hnOMKUIzoz nu cuucs Amocexuoa use one ..m.o. auueuuue uhommnuzo- e unaccoo Ou cooumm eomc so» .z¢ma no «menu azuzaxeaaa uses an awesome a no on.n Afiwubuuuo suOcQIOCOsu Ah a. no mv 89 72 ijne shot'ggctivity) 3.45 1.58 On a REQUEST by your DEPARTMENT CHAIR or DEAN, you have agreed to conduct a 'ONE SBOT' activity (e.g., one day workshop) which is CREDIT PRODUCING at a PRIVATE institution. TOTAL: 35 itels items related to committee roles. The listing of some statements below made by the faculty during the Open-ended interview regarding those items will help to explain such a sorting. l. Tough to make decisions on the committees. Part of our overall responsibilities as professional educators, but chair of professional organization takes time; therefore, should be given load credit. 2. II an! rather ambivalent about. the internal committee) roles. Probably' should not receive load credit but chairs of college or university committees have great responsibilities. 3. I have a major qualification--if any committee ends up requiring 7-10 hours a week (e.g., curriculum committee), then load credit should be given. 4. Difficult to make decisions because some require a lot of time and work and some don't. Similarly, activities described as "one-shot," "non- credit producing" in which faculty ”volunteered their time" and, therefore, "will NOT be paid” were also in the "undecided" category. The means ranged from 2.83 to 3.30. Other one-shot categories but credit pgodtginq were also in this category, with the exception of one item which had 90 been placed in the load credit category. That item had a one-shot activity with the request coming from the department chair or dean and the client institution described as public. However, the mean for that item was so close to the "undecided" category (3.53) that it could easily be placed in that category. Question 2: What differences .are there in the perceptions and belief patterns of faculty members among departments in the College» of Education toward public service? As mentioned in the preceding chapters, there were four departments in the College of Education: (a) Health and Physical Education (HPE), (b) Teacher Education (TE), (c) Administration and Curriculum (EAC), and (d) Counseling, Educational Psychology, and Special Education (CEP). A brief profile of each department is given to provide a: better perspective when the findings are compared among departments. These descriptions are taken from the College of Education report to the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE), 1982 (pp. 2.15-2.16). The Department of Health and Physical Education (HPE). 'This department has graduate instructional, research, and service offerings in the areas of health and physical education. The department also contains undergraduate instructional. offerings in 'health and 91 physical education as well as skills courses available to the entire university student population. The Department of Taacher Edapation (TE). The department contains graduate instructional, research, and service offerings in a broad domain of teacher education policy and practice and the fieldwork research core. It is also the department's primary responsibility for staffing, coordination, and instruction~ regarding the broad array of majors and programs in the area of preservice teacher education. The Department of Agninistaallon and Curriculum £1. The department provides graduate instructional, research, and service offerings in the areas of K-12 administration, college and university administration, adult and continuing education administration, as well as general and specific curricular studies. Other offerings of this department are related to social foundation service course offerings to several undergraduate teacher education programs as well as general graduate social foundation service offerings. lag Department of Cogaselinq. Educational Psychology, and Special Education (CEP). The department of CEP gives graduate instructional, research, and service offerings in the areas of counseling, educational psychology, social psychology: measurement and evaluation, statistics and 92 research design [educational systems development], and several emphases in special education. Also included are a broad array of undergraduate instructional offerings in special education as well as undergraduate psychological foundations instruction for the teacher education programs. In response to the above question, several steps were taken in the data analysis. 1. A master list was prepared displaying the items with the reSpective means and standard devisions according to the respective departments (see (Appendix F). Note, however, that the ranking of means was not done here simply because the focus was to give the readers an idea of the differences in the means and standard deviations when compared by departments. 2. To give an overall view, a matrix was also drawn to accompany the master list (see Appendix G). 3. From the master list, the items were then categorized into the "load credit," "no load credit," and "undecided" categories for each department. The items were rank-ordered according to the means. 4. Graphs were constructed for each department in an effort to isolate the items according to the degree of consensus and Opinion strength (see Figures 3, 4, 5, and 6). Frequency tables of item means and variances for departments HPE, TE, EAC, and CEP are in Appendix H. The following report will make references to the above mentioned tables and figures. 93 Load Cradit Items The findings reveal that faculty members in Departments HPE and TE perceived an equal number of items as those which should receive lgadggagll for public service--21 items or 29.2%. Faculty members in Department EAC perceived 23 items or 31.9%, while the highest number of items in this category was perceived by faculty members in Department CEP with 29 items (40.3%). In reference to items which were perceived as those which shogld NOT receive load ared_il for public service, the findings (no load credit) show that responses in Department EAC showed the highest number--24 items (33.3%). Faculty in Department HPE had perceived 17 items (23.6%), while faculty in Department CEP had 14 items (19.4%). Responses in Department TE had the smallest number of items--1l or (15.28%). We should bear in mind that in comparing the perceptions of faculty among the four departments, what is important is not only the difference in the number of items perceived, but more importantly 3% those items are. The readers are encouraged to refer to Appendix E for the identification of the respective items. As mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, a step was taken to have a closer examination of the items. This was done by isolating items according to the degree of consensus and opinion strength, using the graphic method. 94 By looking at Figures 3, 4, 5, and 6, items were isolated into several groups: * load credit + high consensus (LC + HC) * NO load credit + high consensus (NLC + HC) * load credit + low consensus (LC + LC) * NO load credit + low consensus (NLC + LC) * undecided + high consensus (undecided + HC) * undecided + low consensus (undecided + LC) These items and their respective groups are shown in Table 12 by departments. The table is self-explanatory. The items are also displayed in Figures 3, 4, 5, and 6 for each department--HPE, TE, EAC, and CEP, respectively. It. is clear from 'Table 12 that there are several items on which there was consensus among the four departments. Items on which there was a high consensg that they should receive load credit and which appeared in at least three departments were 9, 14, 37, 43, 60, and 68. These items are listed below. 9 ("On-going" project) On a REQUEST by your DEPARTMENT CHAIR or DEAN, you have agreed to conduct an ”ON- GOING" project (e.g., training programs) which is NON-CREDIT PRODUCING at a PRIVATE institution. You have agreed to VOLUNTEER your time. You will NOT be paid. low consensus high consensus 95 i } 201W} '17 ' T30 : 2.04b : 28. . 62 I 59 .57 : 1.9. 33, e +31 '6' : a 02 : 69 2" ’ I16 1.8-L m. 5 22 is :9 39 oia':__2_°' ___________________ ‘T'fl, -------------- e 3.-.: e49 130T" 6 045 I 34125 52 e e66 - ‘3 35 52.2.3 2.6 i ‘00 ‘ 35.23. ..41 I. 21 AD 53 .58-___ --_5e..-__-_... ___ __ .. ---‘b-----—------ -r 1 -- .1 38. le5‘P . " .7q I I. 67 . ' 19 1.1.. l . 4 .. 11' 7f 5 : ”so '6‘ O I ' 5e33 1.30 I I I ' 319 1.2.I : : i I 1.1-1» : ' , I I 1.0 d I : ‘1 I 0e9 .L ' | I I 0.8 ' ‘ d» I | I I 0.7., I I I I 0.6 q. ‘ I I I I I 0.5 .. I I "i3 I I 6%14 0.4 .. I : I ' I Oe3 1’ i I | l I 0e2 "' l ' J 1 1 - e l 2 ; i j 4 5 no load (undecided I load credit credit Figure :3: AIgraphic representation of items isolated according to the degree of consensus and Opinion strength: Department HPE. low consensus high consensus 96 I I I 1.8 4 ' I I I 1 7 I ' I C b ' IN as I 1.6 0 I' ' 9 g u 1 l 5 II 52.39. .I‘ 3. 72 - > a n5 E5 I ' i .I Q 1929 1.1 92.. 7 ---. 4.-----_-_--231—--2.3-_-36..g_1.57}518;.4769 J 2_l-:OJ.6 16.1 ............. 1.4 .2 . 59. I M ' 054. 32 ,5 n--. ................. 31.26.; .I. ;o.---I..49 ..... 23: _____________ 1.3 .61 5. I 65 555 ‘ 53 3 '1 I67 ‘13 I 37 1'2 I 30 48" ' I I“ .66 . m . I I 1 1 I. on I I I I I .9 1.0 4 .33 ' I d7 ' I I I Dog I I : I I I 0.8 I ' I I . .0 0.7 I I ' | I I 0e6 0' : I 43 . I I I 0'5 d : : 68s 0.4 4 I I I I I I III. e ‘ I I : I e ., I : I I 1 2 I .5. I 4 5 no load unhecided ' load credit credit Figure 4: A graphic representation of items isolated according to the degree of consensus and opinion strength: Department TE. consensus ILCDVV high consensus O 1.5" 1.11 O O 00 0.73 O O O 0 U1 ON .a. I# (I. 33-» 0.2» 97 a I65 30 34 I7 02 15' o 33 31.2 I O 61 I 270 I I» u 0 e 59 704 ----¢MM UHHmam uqthozmm a zum¢mmmm 02H:UHaU< m¢090mmm 3.82 92 622.3: Smfiozom a sous—mam .0555... 5 accesngfi use» we 3:2... so» :2... .1 D i152 BACKGROUND DATA Please check the 15. appropriate responses Your Age: Over 50 ___ 40 - 49 30 - 39 24 - 29 Below 24 16. Number of Years at MSU as 17. 18. a Faculty Member: Over 20 ___ 15 - 19 10 - l4 5 - 9 l - 4 Below 1 Your Presentfiggpk: Professor Assoc. Prof. Asst. Prof. Instructor Number of Years gt Present Rank Over 20 ___ lS - l9 ___ lO - l4 ___ 19. Degrees Held: Ph.D. _ Ed.D. Bachelor Masters Specialist Associate 20. Please state your profession just prior to joining MSU as a faculty member. (Please exclude being a student.) 21. Did you have experience teach- ing at a public/private (K-lZ) school before joining MSU? Yes No 22. If YES, what level? Elementary Middle Secondary APPENDIX B CLASSIFICATION MATRIX OF FUNCTIONAL ROLES (COMMITTEES) EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL TO THE UNIVERSITY INTERNAL EXTERNAL 153 Committee Standing Committee Ad Hoc Committee Bglgg APPOINTED ELECTED APPOINTED ELECTED Department: a. member x x x x b. chair x x x x College: a. member x x x x b. Chair x X X X University: a. member x x x x b. chair x x x x Professional: a. member x x x x b. chair x x x x State/federal: a. member x x x x b. chair x x x x TOTALS: 10 10 10 10 APPENDIX C TREE ANALYSIS FOR "ONE-SHOT" AND ”ON-GOING” PROJECTS 154 I. "One-Shot" Activity (e.g., One-Day Workshop) Public/Private Institution i ) Request by Department Request by Member Chair/Dean of Institution 1 . J. i l I L Credit Non-Credit Credit Producing Producing Producing J, W, Voluntarily Paid Contributed Time Unpaid i (L- Flows to Flows to University Consultant 1rqm - s "T—W————_— 155 II. "On-Going" Project (e.g., School Improvement Programs Public/Private Institution l v w Request by Department Request by Member Chair/Dean of Institution i L 1 Credit Non-Credit Credit Producing Producing Producing l (L Voluntarily Paid Contributed Time Unpaid Flows to Flows to University Consultant APPENDIX D CARD-SORT INSTRUMENT: LIST OF PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITIES —_— Fv-v‘ 156 .weuuHeeoo HmucmELHmdwe ozHozaem a mo mHamo assumes swan use: so» HMHOH Hmcuouch .weuuHeeoo NuHmuo>Hcs ozHazcem n no zommmm umHmmo omezHomma amen w>ms so» HOHOL HmcumucHV .Hw>mH Houmcmu\mumum on» um mwuuHEEOO quozm£ 50» HSHOL Hmcuwuxmv .coHusuHumcH ma¢>Hmm m um UZHUDoomm BHDMMU mH :oHns HmEmumOLQ mchHmuu ..m.wv DoomOLQ sozHouuzog cm uospcoo o» mmmumm o>mn so» .zmmm so mHmn so» HmH0u Hmcuuuch w v .osmd an 902 HHms sow .meau ago» mmmezoao> 0» emwumm so» .comusumumcH oHamDm m an UZHUDDOMQ BHQHMUIZOZ mH soHcs Hmo:mxuos map mco ..m.mv NDH>Huom caomwlmzo: m uosccoo o» cmmumm m>m£ so» .z¢mn uO chmU ezmzemcmmo ago» an awesome a co HNuH>Huom cuonmumcocv .coHusuHumcH oHHnsm man an oHam an HHHz so» .OZHUDQ Iomm BHDmmUIzoz mH £OH£3 HmEmumOLQ ucmEm>0umEH Hoonom ..m.m. summons .ozHoonzo. cm monocoo o» possum m>mz sow .coHusuHumcH UHHmDm m no sense: m an awesome m :o HuomwOLQ zucHomlcogv .coHumuHcmmuo Hmconmwu0um m mo mouuHeeoo 00m as cm «0 mmmzmz omeomqm coon e>ms so» HmHOL Hmcumuxm. m H 157 .munum>Hcs ecu Cu moom ucoemmm .pmuomcomm huHmuo>Hcs mH moonOLQ one .wzHODoomm aHommunzoz mH onnz .HQOLm (Laos New wco ..m.mv NBH>Heo< aaommumzog m uospcoo ob powumm m>ms so» .coHusuHumcH OHHmDm n no mmmzmz m 3 awesome n no HNuH>Huom sycamumcoflfi .wwuumeeoo mmmHHou ozHozaem a do mamas: assumes cwmn w>mn so» HwH0u Hmcumucwfi .wuHmum>Hcs on» 0» meow newsman .meOmcomw muHmLm>Hcs wH HomnOLQ use .coHusuHumca oHHnsm m an .ozHooaomm eHommonzoz mH noan .HmEmumOLQ ucmem>0umEH HOOsom ..m.mv summons .ozHoouzog cm Losecoo ob possum m>mn so» .zwH HMmewu\mumum ecu um wmuuHeeoo oom ac an «0 mmmzmz QMBUEHW cwwn w>m£ DOM HmHou Hmchuxmfi . .eouuHEEoo wuHmue>Hcs 00: am no mo mHmn 50» HOHOH Hmchuch oH .mmuuHEEoo wuHmuo>Hcs qumzmn 90» HMHOL HmcuoucH. mH .wouuHEEOO HmucmEDHmdwo ozHozaem a mo mmamo omezHomma coon m>ma so» HwHOL Hmcueuch .mmmd mp 902 HHS: sou .meHu Lao» mmmezaao> 0» common o>mn so» .coHuzuHumcH me¢>Hmm m um ozHoDaomm eHommouzoz mH :oHns HmsmumOLQ mchHmuu ..m.wv Down0um :ozHowuzog cm unaccoo Cu momumm e>mn so» .zmmo uo «Hmmu ezmzemamma ago» an awesomm m no va mH HuoowOLQ socHomlcogm NH HH OH m 158 .eHmd on 902 HHH3 sow .eEHu Lao» mmmezaao> 0» ommumm msm: so» .UzHODoomm BHQMMUIZOZ mH nonz Hmonmxuos amp mco ..m.ov muH>Huom sfiommlmzoa m mosccoo Ou cmmumm m>mn mom .coHusuHumcH UHHmDm m Lo mmmzmz m an awesome n no Hausssuom .uonmnucouH .oeuuHeeoo muHmuw>Hcs O0: o< as no mmmzmz nmeomqm some men: sow HwHOL Hmcuwucmfi .coHumuHcmmuo Hmconmmu0um m «0 mouuHEEOO quozmem m «0 mmmzmz amezHommd coon m>mc so» HMHOL Hmcumuxmm .auHmuo>Hcs ecu Cu moom ucmewmm .meOmcomm wuHmum>Hcs mH uoomOLQ one .ozHoDoomm eHommouzoz mH noch macaw Ixuos Amp mco ..m.ov >DH>Huom .eomm mzou m uosocoo 0» ewwamm m>mn 50» .comusuHumcH me<>Hmm m no $ng m 3 awesome a co HNuH>Huom suonmlmcogv .ozHosoomm eHommo mm coHss HmEmumOLQ mchHmuu ..m.mv uoowoum cquowlzog cm uosmcoo ob possum e>mn so» .coHusuHumcH ma<>Hmm a mo mmmzmz m an awesomm a co HMOprum emcHomncogv .Hm>mH Hauwpmw\mumum on» an emuuHEEoo 00m 04 cm «0 mmmzmz QmBZHOmmd Emma O>mz 50% HMHOH Huanmuxmv .wwuuHeeoo wuHmuo>Hcs 00: am cm «0 mmmzmz DmBzHommd amen m>mn 50% HMHOL Hmckuch .coHusuHumcH wum>Hum was an oHHmm m um .ozHoooomm eHommonzoz mH :oHcs Hmonmxuos amp oco ..m.mv wuH |>Huom gsommlmzoz m monocoo o» possum w>mz 50> .zmmo so demO ezmzemammo ago» an emmbomm a co ANuH>Huom :uOnmlmcocv om mH wH pH 159 .coHusuHumcH OHHnsm mnu an oHam an HHHz so» .quUDoomm BHammolzoz wH noHcs Amosmxuos mmmumco ..m.me NLH>Huum .eommumzo. m uosmcoo Cu possum m>mc sow .coHusuHumcH OHHmDm m we mugs: m an awesome m :o H>uH>Huom suonmlmcowm .coHusuHumcH oHHnsm man an aHHuum geomm mzo. m uosocoo on powumm m>mn so» .zLuom .uonm mcons .coHumanmmuo Hmconmmu0um m m0 wmuuHEEoo quazmn so» HoHOL HmcLouxm% .UzHUDQ 10mm BHommO mH noHcs HmEmumOLQ uce5m>0umEH Hoonom ..m.mv unencum equowszo: cm uosmcoo cu mmoumm e>mz so» .coHusuHumcH UHHmDm a mo sense: a an awesome a co HuooHOLQ cmcHOUICOLH Hm .omuuHeeoo ommHHoo 00: m4 on no mmmzmz DmezHommd amen m>mn so» HwHOH HmchucHy .DzHosaomm BHommU mH :oHns Hmonmxuos amp mco ..m.mv >DH>Huom :Bommlmzo: m monocoo Ou mmmumm m>mn so» .coHusuHmcH OHHmDm m mo meals: a an 3an m :o om H>uH>HuOm :uOnmIOCO:U .oouuHEEOU HmucoEuummmm 00m ac am no mHmn so» mm HMHOL HmcuwucHe mm bu mm mm 160 .mmuuseeoo mmoHHoo ozsozsem m so sssso osezHosss cmmn o>ms so» HUHOL HmCLoDCHH .coHusuHumcH osssss m as ozHobooss asasso ms :oan Hmonmxuos amp wco ..m.mv muH>Huom geommlmzo: m mospcoo cu pmmsmm m>mn so» .zcmo so mHmmU ezszessssa ago» an emssoss m co H>DH>Huom :uonmlmcogy .msmd mn eoz HHH3 50» .meHu Loom mmmazsqo> Cu pwwumm memz so» .coHuouHumcH UHHmpm m um ozsoaooss esossonzoz ms cuss: HmEmsmOLQ ucmew>0smEH Hoesom ..m.mv uoomOsm zquowuzo: cm uospcoo Op pwmumm m>mz so» .zamo so chmo ezszessssa use» an emsboss m co HuomeLQ socHomlc0hfi .coHumuHcmmso Hmconmmmosm m «0 mmuuHeeoo 00: as cm «0 mmmzmz nmszHommm amen m>mn so» HwHOL Hmcumuxmu .mwuuHeeoo mmmHHoo Uom as am so am chmu omeomqm amen m>mc so» HOHOL Hmcsmuch .mmuuHEEOO HmucmELUmdmm ozsszsem a so ssmzs: assesss coma m>ms so» HOHOL HmchucHV mm .coHusuHumcH mum>Hsm on» an msms ma HHss no» .wzHODoomm BHommUIzoz mH noHns HmEmumOLQ mchHmsu ..s.mv summons .ozsoouzo. cm uospcoo o» pmeumm m>ms so» .cosususumcs se<>Hss m so ssszsz m .3 emssoss m co HwomflOsQ gmcHomlcocv Rm .cosususmcs osssss m um ozsooooss esosso ms cuss; Imamsm (One ucme>0smEH Hoo:om ..m.wv uoonOsm squowlzo: cm uospcoo Om pmmsmm o>mn pom .zmn so» HUHOL HmCLmuxmm .mwuuHEEOO mmmHHoo uzsazssm n so sssso assesss ammo m>ms so» AOHOH HMCHOUC Hy .msms an 902 HHH3 soa .wEHu ssoa sssezsso> 0» pmmsmm m>mc nos .coHusuHumcH se<>Hmm m um ozHODoomm BHommUIzoz mH :och Hmonmxsos amp mco ..m.mv auH>Huom geosmnszo. m uospcoo o» pmmsmm m>mc soa .zmmm so mHmmU ezszesmsso saoa an emssoss m so HauH>Huom :uosmnmcowfi .Hw>wH ssssoss\semc so» HwHOL Hmcumuxms aunsm>Hc= mm» o» mwom ucwsamm .meOmcomm auHmsm>Hcs mH DoonOLQ one .ozsosooss esossouzoz mH.soHss .HmEmumOLQ ucmEm>0smEH Hoosom ..m.mv DownOLQ cquoo:zoc cm uospcoo cu pmmsmm m>mn soa .coHusuHumcH UHHmpm be m so ssmzsz m an emssoss m :0 Huomw0uasmcHoolcosu .coHumchmmso Hmconmmu0sm m so mmuuseeoo uzsozsem m so me ssszsz assesss swan m>ms so» HWHOL Hmchuxmv .auHmsm>Hcs en» 0» mwom ucmEamm .pmHOmcomu auHmsm>Hcs mH uooflOLQ one .cossusumcs se<>sss m um ozsoaooss esossonzoz ms noHns Hmosmxsos amp mco ..m.mv auH>Huom :Bommlmzo: m mospcoo Ou pmmumm m>mn soa .zHuom suocmlmcov: .Hm>mH Hmuepou\mumum ecu um ambuseeoo ozsozsem m so mmmzmz DWEUWHN GOOD O>ms 50% we HmHOL Hmcsmuxmv me we Hp ow 162 .mmuuHEEOO Hmucmsuummmm ozHazsem m «0 ssmzsz ssszHosss swan m>ma nos HMHOL HmchucHV .msms an 902 HHsz 50» .mEHu ssoa mmmazaqo> Cu possum soa .UzHoboomm eHossouzoz ms cuss: ImamsmOLQ mchHmsu ..m.mv uownOLQ UzHoo :20 cm uospcoo o» pmesmm m>mn :oa .coHusuHum:H se<>sss m so msszsz m an emssoss m .5 HMUmfl0sd gucsomncoge .Hw>mH Hmsmpmw\wumum ecu um mmuuHEEOO 00m Gd cm «0 MH¢mU QmBZHOmm< cmwn m>mn 50% HeHOL Hmchuxmv .mmuuHeeoo wmmHHoo Oom am cm mo mmmzmz nmsomqm camp m>mn soa HWHOL HmCqucwv .mwuuHEEoo mmeHoo 00: as am no chmU amazHommm amen m>mn :oa HwHOL HmchDCHL .coHusuHumcH mum>sus may as uses ma HHHs so» .cosususumcs ses>sss m an wzHonoomm BHommolzoz mH £0w£3 HmEmsmOHQ mchHmuu ..m.ev sown nous .ozsooszo. am uusmcoo 0» pummmm w>mn 50a .z4mn m0 demu ezszesssso ssoa an emssoss m :o mm HMUmw0us .mcHouucoge .auHmsm>Hcs mas o» mmom ucmEamm .meOmcomm auHmsw>Hcs mH uomnOLQ was .coHusuHumcH UHHmDm m um quoooomm BHammUIzoz mH noHns Hmonmxuos amp wco ..m.mv aus>suom geosm:szo. m uosmcoo o» pmmsmm m>ms soa .zmmo so chmu ezszesssso saga an emseoss m co mm NNuH>Huom sponmlmcoav em .wwuuHeeoo auamum>scs ozHozsem m so mmmzmz amazHommc sewn m>mn soa HMHOL HmCsmuch mm .wmuuHEEOO HmucmELHmsmm oos as am so HOD—=05 DMBWQfl GOOD warm: 50% Nm HMHOL Hmcsmuch Hm om mp mp 163 .weuuHeeoo HmucwEuummmp 00m am am no demu omezHommm comm m>ma soa HmHOL Hmchucmfi .coHusuHumcH wum>Hsm was an osss an HHL3 so» .wzHUDoommxaHommolzoz mH noHns Hmonmxsos amp wco ..m.me aus>suom .eosmuszo. m uospcoo o» possum e>mn :oa .cosususumcs se<>Hss m so ssszsz m an emssoss m :o Haus>suom .uosmumcmua .coHusuHumcH oanss may as osss ma HHsz so» .coHu IsuHumcH UHHmDm m um quusoomm BHommUIZOZ mH soHns HmEmsmOLQ ucmEm>0smEH Hoonom ..m.wv Down loss .szsoouzo. cm uosmcoo 0» pmmsmm m>mn soa .zmmn so demu ezszesssso ssoa an emssoss m co Huomw0sm,socHomlc0M% .auHmsm>Hco may 0» meow ucoeamm .pmsomcomm aunuo>Hcs mH Down0sm one .cosusuHumcH ses>Hss m um .szsobooss esosmouzoz ms :oan HmEmLUOLQ mchHmuu ..m.mv uoonOHQ ngHowlzo: cm uospcoo as pessmm w>mc soa .zmma so mHmmO mm ezszesssso ssoa an emssoss m :o HuomHOLQ socHouIcoge .wmuuseeoo mmmHHoo szsozssm m so ssmzsz osezsosss ammo msms so» HmHOL HmCqucw% .mouuHseoo auHmuo>Hcs 00: as cm mo mHmmu mmeomqm amen m>ma soa Np HmHOL HmcumucHH .msms ms 902 HHsz so» .meau sooa sssezsso> on museum 20» .ozHoboosm eHossonzoz mH noHss Hmonmxsos amplmco ..m.mv sus>auum .sosmuszo. m uospcoo o» pmmumm m>mn soa .cosususumcs ses>sss m so msszsz m an emsboss m co Hm HauH>Huom :uonmnmcoge ow mm mm mm 164 .ozsooaoss eHommU mH noHsz Hmonmxsos amp «:0 ..m.wv auH>Huom geosmuszo. m Losmcoo on mmossm m>ms soa .cosususumcs ses>sss m so ssmzsz m an emssoss m co ANHH>MUUM IHOSW'UCOSV .coHumchmmso Hmconmmw0sm m «0 mwuuHeeoo 00: am am no mH¢mU amazmommd amen m>m£ 50» HMHOL Hmchuxufi .Hm>wH Hmsmpmu\mumum ecu um mmuuHEEoo 00: 94 cm mo demU nmaomam amen o>ms so» HwHOL HmCLmuxmv .auHmsm>Hcs mm» o» meow ucwEamm .pesomcomm auHmsw>Hcs mH uomflOLQ was .wzHUDnomm eHnmmolzoz mH onsz DownOLQ :UzHOUIZOa cm Dospcoo o» pmmsmm m>mn soa .coHusuHumcH m9¢>Hmm m so ssmzsz m an emsaoss m .5 Huowh0smxnm:HOUIc0hp .coHumchmmuo Hmconmmu0sm m «o mwuuHeeoo 00m as cm «0 demu oweomqm coma m>mn 50a HMHOL Hmcsouxmv Ha .Hw>oH Hmuopem\mumum ecu um mwuuHeeoo quozmem m mo mHmmO omezHomm< seen m>mn soa HMHOL Hmchuxmu on .meuuHEEOO ausmum>scn ozHozsem m so ssmzsz osspsss cums w>mn so» HUHOu Hmchuch as .msms ms soz HHss nos .mesu usoa sssezsso> 0» mmmumm so» .UzHoaaomm esossonzoz ms soscs .HmemsmOHQ ucmsm>0smEH Hoonom ..m.mv DownOLQ zquoonzo: cm uospcoo o» pemumm wsms soa .cosususumcs osssss m so ssmzss m an emssoss m :o mm AuOOWOHQ sUCwOUlflcsg hp mm mm pm 72 165 ("One shot" activity) On a REQUEST by your DEPARTMENT CHAIR or DEAN, you have agreed to conduct a "ONE SHOT” activity (e.g., one day workshOp) which is CREDIT PRODUCING at a PRIVATE institution. APPENDIX E FACULTY CONSENT FORM AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR SORTING THE CARD-SORT INSTRUMENT 166 FACULTY'S CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN THE STUDY OF PERCEPTION OF FACULTY MEMBERS TOWARD PUBLIC SERVICE I agree to 'participate in the study of perception of faculty members toward public service being conducted by Rashidah Shuib, a doctoral candidate in the College of Education, Michigan State University. I understand that as a participant in the study I will be expected to do the following: a. provide time of about 45 :minutes to the researcher, and b. fill in the questionnaire and sort out the cards as required. I understand that these responsibilities will take about 45 minutes of my time. I also understand that I could receive a c0py of the completed study upon my request to the researcher. Finally, I understand that the following precautions will be taken to protect against abuse of my confidence or the data from this study. a. All data collected during this study will be kept gonfigentigl and the study will be reported without the identification of individual faculty members or their departments. b. I may obtain data on myself and review it with the researcher. c. These data will not be used in my evaluation by the organization I am in. d. I may withdraw from the study at any time without recrimination. Signature Date The 167 INSTRUCTIONS FOR SORTING THE PUBLIC SERVICE ACTIVITY CARDS following definitions are provided below to offer clarifications for two important terms used in this procedure: a. LOAD CREDIT: This refers to faculty activities which are recognized by a department as a formal part of the faculty's duties and responsibilities for which he/she is paid by the institution (college). b. CREDIT PRODUCING: Credit producing activities are those which the clients of that activities that you are involved with have to pay tuition or fees to participate and subsequently will be rewarded either in terms of credits or degree or some form of a formal recognition. Sorting Procedpres l. The purpose of sorting these cards is mainly to find out the kinds of activities which are perceived by faculty members to be the ones that SHOULD RECEIVE or SHOULD NOT RECEIVE load credit for public service. There are five categories, ranging from Category 1: definitely should NOT receive load credit for public service, to Category 5: definitely should receive load credit for public service. You are required to sort the cards into any of the five categories. There is no order in sorting the cards. You are free to change your mind as you go along. There is no restriction on the number of cards for each category. (NOTE: At the back of each card is an example of the respective activity. The examples are merely to illustrate a point and should not be used to make decisions.) APPENDIX F A MASTER LIST OF THE ITEMS (ACTIVITIES) WITH MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR FOUR DEPARTMENTS Items oxoooxlmmbwm L» U)LO w as N as N no N hJ N no N rd H +4 H +4 H +4 H +4 H w R314 c>xo m aJ<fi unss w R314 c>xo m ~J.a F4 NHHWHHNWF—‘NLUWI—‘I—‘Nubwwb \) N Rank Order of Variances Variance HIGH CONSENSUS LOW CONSENSUS 0.42 0.48 0.97 1.25 1.32 1.34 1.37 1.41 1.42 1.45 1.49 1.51 1.55 1.57 1.58 1.60 1.62 1.64 1.65 1.70 1.73 1.75 1.76 1.78 1.81 1.83 1.84 1.85 1.89 1.90 Frequency N FJPH N RJIH oxIH H +4.a HIIA H R3~q Rare m RJIH F‘L» H FJIH N FJIH N 173 Frequency Variance 1.91 34 99 ll 2 l O O 2 mszmmZOU BOA NO LOAD CREDIT UNDECIDED Mean 1.56 1.69 1.81 1.88 2.31 2.38 2.50 2.56 2.63 2.69 2.75 2.81 2.88 3.00 3.06 3.13 3.19 3.25 3.38 3.44 3.50 Department: 174 TE Rank Order of Means Frequency 1 WHHNNmeQwub-wNHI-‘HNOJHW LOAD CREDIT Mean 3.56 ' 3.63 3.69 3.75 3.81 3.88 3.94 4.06 4.19 4.31 4.38 4.63 4.69 4.75 4.88 Frequency 2 H +4 H F4 N #4 N FJIH uIIa N F4 H Variance LOW CONSENSUS 1.63 1.61 1.55 1.53 1.52 1.50 1.48 1.46 1.44 1.41 1.40 1.39 1.37 1.36 1.35 1.34 1.33 1.32 175 Rank Order of Variances Frequency ------- 1.31---------—- 2 thNwmeNwNmHI-‘WNNH Variance. HIGH CONSENSUS 1.28 1.27 1.26 1.25 1.24 1.22 1.21 1.20 1.18 1.14 1.11 1.03 1.01 0.96 0.72 0.58 0.48 0.34 Frequency 1 H +4 H +4 H +4 H FJIO H'bo N Para P‘tu H 176 Department: EAC Rank Order of Means Rank Order of Variances Mgap Frequency Variance Frequency 1.81 2 0.25 1 B 1.88 5 0.45 2 g 1.94 4 0.81 1 g 2.00 4 g 0.98 1 2 2.06 1 g 1.12 2 S 2.25 3 g 1.15 4 O 2.31 2 8 1.16 2 z 2.38 1 5 1.18 2 2.44 2 E 1.20 4 ““3125 “““““ 1 “““ 1 2.56 2 1°24 2 2-63 1 _-_--_i;3§--___-___3 ..... 2.69 1 1.26 1 E: 2.75 3 1.29 1 a 2.81 2 1.33 1 E) 2.88 1 1.34 3 g 2.94 2 1.36 3 3.00 1 1.37 1 3.00 1 1.38 1 3.13 5 1.39 1 3.44 1 1.41 6 ----3.50 -------- 4 ------- 1.44 3 3.75 2 1.45 1 3.81 2 ------ 1.46 --------- 6 ----- 3.88 2 1.47 2 E 4.13 1 m 1.48 3 g 4.19 1 a 1.50 4 0 4.25 3 5% 1.54 3 D H10) 5 4.31 5 g 1.56 1 '4 4.38 2 0 1.59 1 4.44 1 1.61 1 4.63 4.75 4.94 \J Nl-‘NI-J 177 1.67 1.71 1.73 1.75 1.78 H F4 H F‘ H N 178 Department: CEP Rank Order of Means NO LOAD CREDIT Mean 1.27 1.36 1.64 2.00 2.01 2.18 2.27 2.46 2.55 2.64 2.73 2.82 ---2.11 UNDECIDED uIL» u: bWNf-‘O ONO‘QCDKO 3.00 b) e w u U) U) ---3.64 LOAD CREDIT a as a 3.72 3.73 3.82 (a) O N O O \D \l \O O H .5 w 0‘ 4.46 Frequengy 1 w +4 H to a ma p.00 H +4 N Ln a +4 w +4 H +4 m ------- 1 p.» l—‘HNWWNNNH Rank Order of Variances Variance HIGH CONSENSUS 0.30 0.36 0.47 0.51 0.65 0.67 0.78 0.91 0.93 0.94 1.00 1.01 1.03 1.04 1.08 1.10 1.17 1.19 1.21 1.29 1.30 1.34 1.35 1.37 1.38 1.40 1.41 1.42 1.44 1.45 Frequency 1 ho a be H as a as H RJIH R11» p.53 N +4 H +4 H +4 H +4 H +4 N +4 H as H 179 1.47 1.50 1.51 1.54 memeZOU 30H 1.64 1.69 1.70 BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY AECT. Educational technology: A glossary of terms. Washington, DC.: AECT, 1977. Allen, H. R. Open doop to learning: The land-grant system enters its second century. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1963. Altbach, P. G., et a1. Academic supermarket. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1971. Anderson, L. G. Land-grant aniversities and their continping challenge. East Lansing: Michigan State University Press, 1946. Araghi, M. A. K. The relationship between university faculty job satisfaction, role conflict, task clarity and productivity. Dissertation apstracts international, October 1981, A; (4). Barikor, C. N. The public service oriented philosophy of higher education with implications for Nigerian rural development. Dissertationiapstracts international, January 1981, $1 (7), 2952-A - 2953-A. Bell, D. The reaffirming of general education. New York: Columbia University Press, 1966. Bergham, CL It Report of the state of Vermpnt: Morrill land-grant‘gentennial committee. 1962. Bernard, W. W., & Blackburn, R. T. Faculty:;ole conflicts in a rapidly changing enyironment. ERIC (Ed 065093), 1972. Berte, N. R., & O'Neil, E. H. Old and new models of service. New directiopa for higher education, Summer 1977, 18, l7-21. ' Best, J. W. Research in education, 3rd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1977. Biddle, B. CL. Role theory. Eapectations, identities! and behaviors. New York: Academic Press, Inc., 1979. 180 181 Biddle, B. J., & Thomas, E. J. (Eds.) Role theory: Concepts and research. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1966. Blackburn, R. T. The meaning of work in academia. New directions for institutional research, Summer 1974, a, 75-99. Blackburn, R. T., et a1. Projgct for fagulty development program evaluation: Final report Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Center for the Study of Higher Education, June 1980 (ED 208 767). Block, J. The g-sort method. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1978 (reprint edition). Bunnell, K. (Ed.) Faculty workload. ‘Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 1960. Bok, D. Beyond the ivory tower. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982. Bowen, H. R. The state of the nation and the agenda for higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Inc., 1982. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. The campus and the city. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1972. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. The purposes and the performance of higher education in the United States. New York: McGraw-Hill, June 1973. Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. Sponsored research of the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975. Cattell, R. Factor analysis: An introduction and manual for the psychologist and social scientist. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1952. Citizens Committee on Higher Education. Report of citizens committee on higher education in Mi_c_:hiqa_r_1. March 1965. Cochran, W. G. Sampling technipues (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1963. Connolly, J. J. A study of faculty involvement in community service programs. Dissertation abstracts international, 1972, 33 (06), 2730-A. 182 Cooper, H. T. Service learning through internships and research for state government. New Directions for Higher Education, Summer 1977, 18, 37-52. Davis, M. A legislative view of the public service functippi of state-supportedaapnivapsitiaa. Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1974. DeVries, D. L. The relationship of role expectations to facultypehaviop Baltimome: Center for the Study of Social Organization of Schools, The Johns Hopkins University, February 1972 (ERIC 061912). Dill, D. D. The structure of the academic profession: Toward a. definition of ethigal issue . Paper presented for American Association for Higher Education meeting, Washington, DC, April 18, 1979. Duley, J. Service as learning, life-style, and faculty function. New Directions for Highep_gEducation, Summer 1977, 18, 23-36. Dunbar, F. W. The Michigan irecord in higher education. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1963. Durzo, J. J., Diamond, R. M., & Doughty, P. L. (An analysis of research needs in instructional development. Journal of Inatrupctional DevelOpmen , Summer 1979, g (4), 4-11. Ebel, R. (Ed.) Encyclopedia of educational research, 4th ed. Londong: The Macmillan Company, 1969. Eddy, E. D., Jr. College of oar land and timas: The land grant idea in Amerigan education. New York: Harper 8 Brothers, 1957. Faiman, R., s. Olivier, M. E. A guestpn offlrtngship. Report and recommendations of the conference on Institutions of Higher Education as a resource in the solution of national problems. Wbshington, DC: The National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges, May 8-10, 1972. Finkelstein, M. J. Understanding American academics: What have we learned and where do we go from here? Occasional paper series, No. 6. New York: State University of New York, January 1980. Freedman, M. Academic culture and faculty development. Berkeley: Montaigne, Inc., 1979. 183 French, J. R. P., Jr., Tupper, C. J., 8 Mueller, E. F. Work load of dniversipy professors. Cooperative research project, No. 2171, Institute for Social Research. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1965. Glass, G. V., & Stanley, J. C. Statistical methods in educatioaal psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1970. Good, C. V. (Ed.) Dictionary of education, 3rd. ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973. Good, H. G., & Teller, J. D. (Eds.) A history of westapp education, 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan, 1969. Graybeal, W. 8. Higher education facdlty: Characteristjics and opiniopa. Washington, DC: National Education Association, 1979. Gross, E., & Granbach, P. V. University goals and academic power. thhington, DC: American Council on Education, 1968. Hall, G. A national agenda for researchjnd development in teacher education, 1979-1984. Austin: University of Texas at Austin, Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, 1979. Halstead, D. K. Statewide planning in higher education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974. Henry, D. D. Challenges past. challenges prejent. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1975. Hood, P. D., & Cates, C. 8. Alternative perspectives on educational .dissemination and linkaga activities. San Francisco: Far West Lab, June 1978. Huber, J. H. The occupational roles of college professors. Final report. University Park: Pennsylvania State University, Department of Sociology, June 1969. Human Interaction Research Institute. Putting knowledga toge: A distillation of the literature rgarding knowlache transfer and chang . Los Angeles: Human Interaction Institute, 1976. Ikenberry, S. 0., & Friedman, R. C. Beyond academic department . London: Jossey-Bass, 1972. 184 Katzer, S. R. M. A study of attitudes of faculty in _e_selected community colleges toward community service. Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1973. Keller, R. T. Role conflict and ambiguity: Correlates with job satisfaction. and Ivalues. Personnel Psychology, Spring 1975, 38 (1), 57-64. Kerr, C. Key issues for higher education in the 19803. New directions fg higher education, VII (28). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1979. Knowles, A. S. (Ed. in Chief) The international ancyclopedia of highap education, _1_. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977. Kohl, J. B. Incentive reward s stems in fagulty orientations toward academic activities at a land grant university. Ed.D. dissertation, Montana State University, 1980. Ladd, E. C., Jr. The work experience of American college professors: Some data and an argument. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Association of Higher Education, Washington, DC, April 16-19, 1979. (ERIC ED 184406) Lehming, R., & Kane, M. (Eds.) Improving schools. Beverley Hills: Sage Publishers, 1981. Lezotte, L. W. Premises and rationale in support of the greatidn of a center for school ipprovement. A proposal paper prepared for Dean J. E. Lanier and Assistant Dean D. Nickerson, College of Education, Michigan State University, January 25, 1982. Lezotte, L. W. The university role in school ipprovement. Presented at the AERA annual meeting, New York City, March 19-23, 1982. Long, D. The university as commons: a view from administration. New Diragtiona for Higher Education, Summer 1977, lg, 75-86. Martin, W. B. Editor's notes--teaching, research, and service--but the greatest of these is service. New Directions fop Higher Education, Summer 1977, 18_, vii-ix. Martin, W. B. Service through ideas and value. New Directions for Higher Education, Summer 1977, lg, l- 16. 185 McAllister, R. J. Service, teaching, and research: Old elements in a new academic melting pot. Journal of Higher Education, July/August 1976, XIVII (4), 471- 478. Meyer, J. Higher education and future national needs. Natiopal Foggy, LXI (l), 45, 46. Michigan State University. Information update from the College of Education. East Lansing: November 4, 1982. Michigan State University. Faculty handpook. East Lansing: MSU, 1982. Michigan State University. Memorandum, Office of the Provost: Mission, strategic goals and planning. East Lansing: MSU, February 18, 1982. Michigan State University. Mission statement, Jane 25, 1982. East Lansing: MSU, 1982. Michigan State University. Plan and procedures for reassessing university priorities in a long-range context. East Lansing: MSU, 1977. Michigan State University. Policy handbook for faculty. East Lansing: MSU, 1970. Michigan State University. Report to the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). East Lansing: MSU, 1982. Michigan State University. A report to the president of MSU from the Committee on the Future of the University. East Lansing: MI, 1959. Michigan State University. The university: Org slgred anterprise. State of the university address, Clifton R. Wharton, Jr., President. East Lansing: MSU, February 14, 1974. Morrill, J. L. ‘The ongoing aniversity. Minneapolis: L University of Minnesota Press, 1960. Murphy, M. T. Faculty in public service activities 'in Baltimore higher education. Ed.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 1974. Murray, M. A., & Crego, E. (Eds.) Higher education and public service career . Chicago: Illinois Institute of Government and Public Affairs, University of Illinois, Public Service Institute, Loop College, 1972. 186 Nevins, A. The statevpniversities and democracy. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1965. Nie, N. H., et a1. Statisticaljackage for the social sciences (SPSSL, 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975. Nie, N. H., & Hull, H. C. (Eds.). SPSS update 7-9. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981. Nielsen, R. M., & Polishask, I. H. The university and the schools. The Chronicla of Higher Education, March 3, 1982, 4. Oppenheinn A. N. Questionnaire: Design and attitude measurement. New York: Basic Books, 1966. Parrott, R. L. A companion of faculty members' reported professional activities and the workload desires of college presidents for faculty members. Disagrtation abstradgs international, August 1980, a; (2), 559-A. Pere, P. J. Development and application of ya plassification model of ppplidvsarvice in instrpgtion of higher education. IEd.D. dissertation, Memphis State University, 1974. Perkins, J. A. The dynamics of aniversity growth: Higher education in revolutionary decade . Berkeley: McCutchen Publishing Corporation, 1967. Perkins, J. A. The univeraity in tpansition. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1966. Perkins, J. A., & Ismel, B. B. (Eds.) Higher education from agtonomy to systeraa. New York: International Council for Educational Development, 1972. Peterson, M. W. Organization and administration in higher education: Sociological and social-psychological perspectives. Review of research in education. Illinois: F. E. Peacock, 1974. Phillips, I. The added dimansion. Washington, DC: National Association of State Universities and Land- Grant Colleges, 1976. Powell, J. P., Barrett, E. M., & Shanker, V. S. L. The; academic life: University teachers talk about their work. Monograph No. 12. Australia: Tertiary Education Research Center, University of New South Wales, 1981. 187 Raizen, S. A. Dissemination programs at the national institute of education. Knowledge: Creation, .diffaaionj atiliaation, December 1979, ‘1 (2), 259- 292. Sanford, N. (Ed.) The Amarican colleg . New York: Wiley, 1962. Shealy, R. E. A bibliography of the literature relapad to the fpnctions and roles of colglage and university faculty. Prepared for the Institute of Higher Education Management. Austin: The University of Texas System, April 1979 (ED 175 313). Shulman, C. H. Old e_x_pec£ations. new realitias: The academic 'profession reunited. AAHE-ERIC/Higher Education Research Report No. 2, 1979. Smith, D. K. Faculty vitality and the management. of university personnel policies. New directirons for institational research, 1978, § (4), l-16. Smith, K. B. 1% descriptive analysis of certain missions, programs, and organizational variables with respect to the academic public service function of selected state colleges and universities. Dissertation apstpacts international, September 1982, 22 (03), 695-A. Sollie, C. R., & Howell, F. M. Univagsity knowled e technol transfer and ublic decision- making: Rev_iew. aynthesis, and alternative models. Rural Development Series No. 11, Southern Mississippi State University, December 1981 (ED 220 011). Sollie, C. R., & Howell, F. M. The pniversity as a (gesoprce system for public naads: Responding to research needs of decision-makers. Case studies. Rural Development Series No. 12, Mississippi State University, December 1981 (ED 221 105). Starkley, R. W. Faculty activity analysis. A stgdy of faculty rasponsibilitias fppg instpgction. research, and public servic . San Diego: University of Southern California, 1977. . Startup, R. The university teacher and hip, world. England: Saxon House, 1979. Stead, R. S. An analysis of the university goals, perceptions, and preferences of studnts, faculty, administrators, and trustees at MSU. Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1971. 188 Stecklein, J. Approaches to measuring workload over the past two decades. flaw directioanor institutional research, volume 1, number 2. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Summer 1974. Stein, J. (Ed.) The Random Hopse dictionary of the English languag . New York: Random House, 1967. Stephenson, W. A study of behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1953. Stroup, K. M. Faculty evaluation. New directions for higher education, volume XI, number 1. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, l983._ ‘ Szilagyi, A. D. An empirical test of causal inference between role perceptions, satisfaction with work, performance and organizational level. Personnel Psychology, August 1977, $2 (3), 375-388. Teather, D. C. B. (Ed.) Staff development in higher education. New York: Nichols, 1979. Trow, M., & Fulton, 0. Research activity in American higher education. In M. Trow (Ed.), Teachers and students. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1975. Tuckman, H. P. Publication. teaching, and the academic gewagd structure. Massachusetts: D. C. Heath & Co., 1976. United States Presidential Commission on Higher Education. The highar education of American democracy. Washington, DC: U. 5. Government Printing Office, 1947. Whitmer, J. M., Jr. Conceptualization and formulization of an optimizing resource allocation model of a public service delivery function in higher education. Dissertation abstracts international, 1979, i0 (07), 3355. Wilson, F. R., a Taylor, J. A graphic method for isolating high consensus--high opinion strength items for evaluation and scale construction. An unpublished paper. East Lansing: College of Education, Michigan State University, undated. MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII W WHIWHIIWHIWI 31293104993252