Project Details
Title
Valuing People – Adjunct Faculty Professional Development Status
REVIEWED
Category 4-Valuing People
Updated
08-29-2010
Timeline
Reviewed
09-19-2010
Created
11-24-2009
Planned Project Kickoff
11-01-2007
Target Completion
Last Modified 09-19-2010
11-01-2010

1:Project Accomplishments and Status

ANSWER:The Valuing Adjunct Team (VAT) that orchestrates this project met once per
month early in the academic year. Fewer meetings were needed toward the end of the
year.

In 2009-10, two training workshops were offered for adjunct faculty each
month. Twelve different topics were delivered on a rotating and as-needed
basis with an average of 10 adjunct faculty attending each workshop.

All new adjunct faculty members were mentored for their first quarter of
teaching as well as any adjunct faculty member who taught a course they
had not taught previously.

REVIEW: Striving to value adjunct faculty and to provide opportunities to increase their
teaching effectiveness, while enhancing student achievement of outcomes is a worthy, yet
increasingly complex project goal -- as you have discovered.Your “effective practices” and
outcomes will be important to share with others in higher education, many of whom are
facing similar challenges.

As you seek to evaluate and document the outcomes of this project, have
you considered monitoring how the adjunct faculty population has increased
or decreased over the past year? At some institutions, adjunct faculty
members turn over at relatively high rates. The retention rate of your
adjunct faculty might be another indicator of your success with this project.

Increasing adjunct faculty participation in professional development
opportunities is often difficult in light of the multiple demands upon their
time. What have you noticed about attendance at your workshop? Has the
participation of adjunct faculty changed over the course of this action
project? Alternatively, do you find the same individuals participating in
multiple workshops? What plans have you developed to increase
participation, if appropriate?

Effective mentoring practices are a popular topic in higher education today,
as institutions seek effective strategies to mentor individuals from diverse
backgrounds. Your plan did not note how you have structured your
mentoring program. Do you provide guidance and/or training for individuals
involved in the mentor and mentee roles? Do mentors or mentees receive
any compensation or support (e.g., reimbursement for beverages/lunch or
gift cards for teaching resources)?

Finally, how have the accomplishments from this project affected policies and
practices? For example, could the mentoring program be expanded to other
offices/units across campus? Or, have hiring practices and policies changed
as a result of this project? Are adjunct faculty “required” to participate in a
specific number or type of workshops depending upon their needs (AQIP
Category 3 Understanding Students’ and Other Stakeholders’ Needs)? Your
project team and collaborators should be commended on their continued
commitment to Helping Students Learn (AQIP Category 1), Valuing People
(AQIP Category Four), and to fostering an inclusive institutional culture.

2:Institution Involvement

ANSWER:The Valuing Adjunct Team has representation from all college constituents. The
team is made up of adjunct faculty, full-time faculty, college administration and college
staff representing all three divisions of the college. The Planning Advisory Committee,
which develops the strategic initiatives and manages AQIP-related processes for the
college, has made Valuing Adjunct Faculty one of the continued action projects.

REVIEW: As institutions in higher education continue to rely heavily on adjunct faculty,
the fact that your institution has decided to continue this project speaks to your
commitment to Valuing People (AQIP Category 4) and to Helping Students Learn (AQIP
Category 1). In addition, the collaboration and relationship building required by the nature
of this project supports Building Collaborative Relationships (AQIP Category 9). While
college stakeholders are most affected by the outcomes of this project, you may find that
community partners or external stakeholders also benefit from the enhanced skills that
their employees (and who serve as adjunct faculty) develop and demonstrate as a result
of participating in this planned professional development initiative.

While not specifically mentioned, if you have not already, you may consider
collaborating with a teaching and learning center and/or a center that
supports instructional technologies.

3:Next Steps

ANSWER:The plan for the next academic year is to continue developing new workshop
offerings and to continue the mentoring process which is in existence at this time.
Another planned step is to tailor the current generic mentoring program to each specific
discipline of the college.

REVIEW: These are reasonable next steps. You might consider the answers to the following
questions: How do you plan to identify which workshops should be offered? Have you
considered alternative formats for delivery of workshops (face-to-face, online, or blended
options)? Are there “spin-off” workshops that could offer advanced skills or that could
examine a specific strategy more in depth? As you strive to address challenges with
assessment, have you discussed how participants demonstrate that they have acquired
the workshop objectives?

Sometimes institutions struggle with engaging all learners, even adult,
adjunct faculty learners. Do you have specific plans to reach individuals who
have elected not to participate in the workshops to date? In addition, if
adjunct faculty do participate, have you considered whether they should
receive any benefits? For example, would they receive any opportunities to
teach specific courses (at specific times) or any opportunities for increased
pay or status as they acquire skills? These are challenging questions to
consider, as some individuals may participate, but may not be able to
demonstrate competently the acquisition of required workshop objectives.

Your plan to tailor the mentoring program to each discipline is exciting and
may lead to the discovery of additional “effective practices.” Will you use a
multiple mentor model? Again, the results of your plan will be important to
share with the higher education community.

4:Resulting Effective Practices

ANSWER:This action project has made adjunct faculty feel valued by this institution, a
consistent response on the professional development and mentoring surveys completed
by adjunct faculty. These programs have resulted in adjunct faculty feeling more
prepared for the challenges they may face in the classroom and further provide a mentor
that they can access to assist them in this learning process. Both the mentoring program
and the professional development program utilize the talents of full-time and adjunct
faculty as well as college staff thus encouraging collaboration across the college.

REVIEW: The fact that adjunct faculty feel more prepared, supported, and valued is
critical. Teaching can certainly be isolating, even for those faculty who teach full-time. To
enable adjunct faculty to feel as if they are an integral part of the institution is vital to
furthering the institution’s goals.

It would be interesting to learn whether mentor behaviors and participation
in professional development have changed (perhaps increasing) as an
unanticipated finding resulting from your work. Another unanticipated
outcome might be that mentors are reflecting upon their work and finding
strategies to enhance their teaching effectiveness at the same time. As you
encourage collaborations across the college, consider noting additional
unanticipated findings.

5:Project Challenges

ANSWER:The challenge the VAT continues to face is in the area of assessment -identifying a method, beyond surveying the adjunct faculty, to determine program
effectiveness. The VAT is working to determine the best assessment measures of program
effectiveness and have considered student academic success as well as student
evaluations of instructors as a starting point. VAT will be meeting with a consultant to
develop an evaluation plan* to help address this challenge.

*A three stage process is used to develop evaluation plans for many projects
at NC State. In this process, project team members participate in a group
process to first develop a logic model, then an evaluation plan and finally a
data template under the guidance of a consultant/facilitator.
o
The logic model identifies key inputs, activities (tasks or process), outputs
(typically activity counts and measures of reach), outcomes and finally,
assumption(s) upon which the initiative is based.
o
The evaluation plan encompasses both formative evaluation and summative
evaluation. Formative evaluation is designed to assess whether the initiative is
working as intended and is likely to produce the intended outcomes. The
summative evaluation focuses on looking at the outcomes achieved -- Were they
what was expected and did they have the intended impact? The summative
evaluation results can also be used to inform long term continuous improvement of
the initiative and to make judgments on the overall value of the initiative. The
formative and summative questions guide the team in determining data or
information needed, sources of data, comparison groups, and methods of data
collection and analysis. Based upon this input, the consultant/facilitator and
Institutional Research finalize the evaluation plan.
o
The data template is a spread sheet that is organized to contain and display the
data and information necessary to carry out the evaluation plan. It serves as a
check list to help assure timely collection, tabulation and display of the data.
The
team develops the basic structure of the data template. Institutional Research
sets up the procedures to populate the data template.

To put the evaluation plan into action, the data templates and supporting
information from surveys and focus groups are used to answer the evaluation
questions.

REVIEW: Effectively evaluating the impact of professional development or faculty
development continues to be a challenge faced by all institutions in higher education. You
appear to be moving forward with a variety of plans that should yield results, inform
future decisions, and that can be aligned with your institutional goals. A consultant should
be able to offer you a variety of recommendations, including the use of multiple
measurements and metrics. To assess the outcomes of the In-Class Conflict management
training, it might be of interest to survey faculty and students on their perceptions of the
classroom environment or “community.” You might also consider examining some of the
literature on “transfer of training,” which originates from business or organizational
development practices. The Professional and Organizational Network in Higher Education
Annual Conference in November 2010 will also have a few sessions addressing the
assessment of faculty development.

Your ability to assess your results has significant implications. Not only will it
inform your planning and evaluation of this project, but it can also inform the
effectiveness of professional development across the campus. Be proud of
your progress to date and of your continued commitment to Valuing People.
Your progress appears to have the potential for making continued positive
impact at your institution.