Preparing Future Faculty
Sponsored by the Council of Graduate Schools and the Association of
American Colleges & Universities, with support from the National
Science Foundation, The Pew Charitable Trusts, and a private donor
Purpose
Improve the way future faculty are
prepared for the teaching, research,
and service responsibilities of faculty
work
Goals
 Increase knowledge, broaden perspectives, and
develop skills of faculty members and doctoral students
 Increase understanding of the changing roles of faculty
 Develop model programs and assess their
effectiveness
 Disseminate models and promising practices
Basic Assumptions
 The Ph.D. is a research degree
 Not all Ph.D. students aspire to faculty careers
 Not all Ph.D. programs aspire to prepare students for
faculty careers or for the full range of colleges and
universities
 There is increasing dissatisfaction with the job
readiness of new Ph.D.’s
Concepts
Doctoral students should . . .
 develop professional expertise in teaching, research,
and service, and start learning to balance and integrate
these responsibilities
 learn about the academic profession
 have experience at a variety of institutions
 learn about changes taking place in teaching and
learning
Concepts continued
Programs should . . .
 include formal systems for mentoring in teaching and
other aspects of professional work
 be planned so that they are appropriate to the student's
stage of development and progress toward the degree
 be integrated into the academic program
 build upon and go beyond Teaching Assistant
orientation and development programs
What is a cluster?
A cluster is a formal, cooperative arrangement involving
different institutions and / or departments--partners-working together. Cluster leadership:
 decides what is needed in new faculty
 gives students opportunities to experience faculty life in
multiple institutional settings
 increases awareness among faculty in both the doctoral
university and partner institutions about the changing
expectations for faculty
Profile of Programs
1993 -1996
PFF 1 — Develop model programs
* 17 clusters with 85 partners
1997 -2001
PFF 2 — Institutionalize & spread programs
* 15 clusters with 110 partners
1998 - 2001
PFF 3 — Preparing Future Science & Mathematics Faculty
* 19 clusters with 83 partners in 5 disciplines
1999 - 2002
PFF 4 — Preparing Future Social Science & Humanities Faculty
* 25 clusters with 95 partners in 6 disciplines
The National Perspective of PFF
Washington
$
Michigan Tech
$ Washington State
SUNY Binghamton
Minnesota$
Cornell
Marquette &
Wisconsin G
$
$
$$ $
$
$
$
Illinois-Chicago $$$
Duquense
Michigan
$
Iowa $
Loyola $
Miami$ Ohio State
Northwestern
$
$
$
$ Cincinnati
Indiana
Nebraska
$
$
$
$
Syracuse
$
New Hampshire
UC-Boulder
UMass-Amherst
Northeastern
Boston College
CUNY Graduate Center
CUNY Queens College
Howard
$
$
Kentucky
$ Duke
UCLA $
Virginia Tech
$
$
UC San Diego
Arkansas$
New Mexico
Arizona State
$
$
North Carolina State
$
Georgia$
South Carolina
Emory $
$
Texas A&M
$
Texas
G
$
Florida State
$
South Florida
Model for PFF One and Two
PFF National Office
Graduate School
Graduate School
Graduate School
Partner Institution
Partner Institution
Partner Institution
Partner Institution
Partner Institution
Partner Institution
Partner Institution
Partner Institution
Partner Institution
Role of PFF National Office
 Writes reports, articles and chapters
 Organizes presentations at meetings of professional
societies and educational associations
 Maintains the PFF web site
 Inserts PFF agenda into meetings where it could make a
difference
 Assesses PFF across clusters and assists clusters in self
assessments
 Consults with institutions wanting to become involved
 Consults with foundations about similar programs
 Maintains PFFNET, a resource listserv
PFF 1 Graduate Schools: 1993-1996
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
CUNY GRADUATE SCHOOL AND UNIVERSITY CENTER - 6 partners
CORNELL UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
DUKE UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
EMORY UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
HOWARD UNIVERSITY - 4 partners
LOYOLA UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO - 4 partners
MARQUETTE UNIV & UNIV OF WISCONSIN-MILWAUKEE -10 partners
NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY - 4 partners
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY - 5 partners
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI - 7 partners
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - 6 partners
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA - 14 partners
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS-AUSTIN - 4 partners
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON - 7 partners
PFF 2 Graduate Schools: 1997 - 2001
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
DUKE UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY - 6 partners
HOWARD UNIVERSITY - 5 partners
INDIANA UNIVERSITY - 15 partners
MARQUETTE UNIV & UNIV OF WISCONSIN-MILWAUKEE -10 partners
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY - 4 partners
SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY - 5 partners
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI - 7 partners
UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO-BOULDER - 8 partners
UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - 6 partners
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA - 14 partners
UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA-LINCOLN - 7 partners
UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE - 3 partners
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON - 7 partners
Model for PFF Three and Four
PFF National Office
Disciplinary Society
Disciplinary Society
Disciplinary Society
Graduate Department
Graduate Department
Graduate Department
Partner Department
Partner Department
Partner Department
Partner Department
Partner Department
Partner Department
Partner Department
Partner Department
Partner Department
Disciplinary Associations
PFF Three
•
•
•
•
American Association of Physics Teachers
American Chemical Society
American Mathematical Society & Mathematical Association of America
Special Interest Group on Computer Science Education / ACM
PFF Four
•
•
•
•
•
•
American Historical Association
American Political Science Association
American Psychological Association
American Sociological Association
National Communication Association
National Council for Teachers of English
Role of Disciplinary Associations
 Create leadership teams to exercise oversight, give
advice and assess the projects
 Select and make awards to at least four doctoral
degree granting departments to pilot PFF programs
 Offer technical assistance to maintain participant focus
on project goals
 Develop dissemination activities consistent with the
associations’ on-going operations
 Report to CGS and AAC&U
 Participate in assessment activities
Role of Academic Departments
 Create a cluster of partner institutions and appoint a
cluster steering committee to plan and oversee the
collaboration
 Provide students with an intensive, hands-on experience
to learn about faculty life in a range of different institutions
 Prepare guidelines for the selection and training of
mentors
 Collaborate with current PFF departments in their
disciplines and utilize their experience with PFF activities
 Expose students to new and emerging pedagogies and
course enhancements
PFF 3 Academic Departments: 1998 - 2001
Biological and Life Sciences
• DUKE UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI - 3 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA-LINCOLN - 7 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA - 4 partners
Chemistry
• DUQUESNE UNIVERSITY - 6 partners
• QUEENS COLLEGE OF CUNY - 3 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-LOS ANGELES - 3 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS-AMHERST - 5 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN - 6 partners
Computer Science
• UNIVERSITY OF IOWA - 4 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI - 3 partners
PFF 3 Academic Departments: 1998-2001
Mathematics
• ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY - 4 partners
• BINGHAMTON UNIVERSITY of SUNY - 4 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON - 2 partners
• VIRGINIA TECH - 3 partners
Physics
• HOWARD UNIVERSITY - 5 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS - 3 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-SAN DIEGO - 4 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO-BOULDER - 8 partners
PFF 4 Academic Departments: 1999-2002
Communication
• HOWARD UNIVERSITY - 4 partners
• INDIANA UNIVERSITY - 6 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY - 4 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO - 4 partners
English
• HOWARD UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
• MICHIGAN TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY - 5 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO - 3 partners
• WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY - 2 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA - 3 partners
History
• ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY - 4 partners
• BOSTON COLLEGE - 3 partners
• FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY - 4 partners
• HOWARD UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
PFF 4 Academic Departments: 1999-2002
Political Science
• HOWARD UNIVERSITY - 3 partners
• INDIANA UNIVERSITY - 4 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO-BOULDER - 5 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS-CHICAGO - 4 partners
Psychology
• MIAMI UNIVERSITY - 5 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO-BOULDER - 3 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA - 4 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE - 6 partners
Sociology
• INDIANA UNIVERSITY - 6 partners
• NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY - 5 partners
• TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY - 7 partners
• UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA-LINCOLN - 6 partners
University Activities
 organize seminars taught by faculty and
administrators from different institutions on issues
unique to different types of institutions
 offer certificate programs in PFF
 discuss the roles of teaching, research and service
in a multicultural setting and teaching about diversity
University Activities
 help students develop portfolios documenting
expertise in teaching, research, and service
 explain academic governance systems
 invite doctoral students to attend faculty meetings or
committee meetings
 train faculty to mentor students in areas beyond
research
Academic Department Activities
 organize forums for junior and senior faculty
members to describe and analyze their professional
lives
 invite doctoral alumni to discuss how their careers
do or do not connect with what they did in their
graduate program
 offer courses on teaching in their discipline
 revise doctoral program guidelines to require PFF
experiences
Academic Department Activities
 offer seminars on professional issues like academic
freedom, collective bargaining, and the impact of
new technologies
 create forums to discuss faculty histories, career
paths, and alternative professional lifestyles
 support doctoral students attending professional
meetings and making presentations
Partner Departments and Campus Activities
 discuss their distinctive academic missions and different
academic cultures
 discuss the roles and expectations for faculty at their own
and similar institutions
 assign participating doctoral students to faculty mentors for
teaching and service
 permit doctoral students to teach a unit or entire course and
providing feedback from mentors
 invite participants to attend faculty, committee, or
departmental meetings
 involve doctoral students in faculty development activities
What we have learned?
 Interest in faculty preparation programs is growing
 Educational associations and funding agencies are
supporting PFF ideas and practices
 It is possible to create new forms of institutional
collaboration
What we have learned? continued
 Doctoral students are enthusiastic about PFF programs
 Partner faculty enjoy working with doctoral students
 Graduate faculty appreciate the opportunities that PFF
programs give their students
What we have learned? continued
 PFF programs appear to be successful
 Doctoral students, graduate faculty, and partner faculty
would recommend their PFF programs to others
 Benefits to departments and universities include
recruitment, retention and placement
 Benefits outweigh the modest investments of time and
money that they require
Benefits to
University Faculty
 Increased focus on students’ needs in advising
 Increased dialogue among students and faculty
 Opportunities to discuss academic life and college
teaching as a career
 Meeting interesting new colleagues
 Greater appreciation for and understanding of the ways
the ‘life of the mind’ is expressed in other college
contexts
 Recharged enthusiasm for teaching
Benefits to
Partner Faculty




Assisting students in understanding the their institution
Sharing expertise with the next ‘generation’ of faculty
Increased enthusiasm in teaching
Perspective broadened by seeing themselves through an
outsider’s eyes
 New ideas and energy garnered from doctoral students
 Opportunity to interact with colleagues within the cluster
Doctoral Student Comments
University of Cincinnati
“My experience with the PFF project has been one of the
highlights – if not the (italics in original) highlight of my
doctoral study.”
The Ohio State University
“I don’t feel like a student. I feel like a professional
pursuing a career.”
Doctoral Student Comments
Arizona State University
“…the PFF program helped me build confidence in myself as a
scholar, as well as what I have to bring to the table as a young
professor.”
“I went to a conference and what struck me profoundly … was
how much more savvy I was than the other graduate students
there. Not only was I aware of this difference, but other people
commented on it.”
PFF “has been, without question, one of the most meaningful
parts of my graduate school experience (italics added). The
first test of the value of PFF was my successful job search.”
Doctoral Student Comments
Northwestern University
“It was great being mentored – you get so much out of the program
when you are closely involved with someone at another institution.
You learn about the school, what it’s like to teach there, and you
get to know the faculty.” (History Student)
“I have heard insights from faculty at other institutions, who are
perhaps more likely to have experimented with alternative teaching
techniques, such as the use of computers in the classroom or
calculus reform projects.” (Mathematics Student)
“PFF has provided a foundational and life-changing experience. The
program supplied a provocative forum for intellectual growth and
critical reflection….” (Chemistry Student)
PFF 1 Cluster
University of Washington
English, Mathematics, Sociology & Zoology Departments
in cooperation with:
North Seattle Community College
Seattle Central Community College
Seattle Pacific University
Seattle University
University of Puget Sound
Western Washington University
University of Washington-Bothell
PFF 2 Cluster
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
in cooperation with:
Chadron State College
Creighton College
Doane College
Metropolitan Community College
Nebraska Wesleyan University
University of Nebraska-Omaha
Grambling State University
PFF 3 Cluster
Mathematical Association of America & American Mathematical Society
Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University
Department of Mathematics
in cooperation with:
Bridgewater College
Virginia State University
Washington and Lee University
PFF 4 Cluster
National Communication Association
&
American Political Science Association
Howard University
Departments of Communication and Political Science
in cooperation with:
Bowie State University
George Mason University
Howard Community College
Marymount College
The Catholic University of America
Benefits Students Rated ‘Very Much’ & ‘Quite a Lot’
Understanding of faculty roles
Awareness of diverse institutions
Interest in academic career
Knowledge of job market
Knowledge of job search
Knowledge of teaching
Knowledge of institutional governance
Teaching skill and confidence
Ability to work with diverse students
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
People Who Encouraged or Discouraged for Doctoral
Students
Discouraged
Encouraged
Partner Faculty
Graduate Dean
Family
Department Head
Other Students
Departmental Faculty
Major Adviser
0
20
40
60
Percent
80
100
Would you recommend PFF to others?
Graduate Students
1995
1996
University Faculty
1995
1996
University Administrators
1995
1996
Partner Faculty
1995
1996
Partner Administrators
1995
1996
Yes*
Percent
No
Percent
98.9
99.4
1.1
0.6
100
100
0
0
100
100
0
0
100
98.2
0
1.8
100
100
0
0
* without & with
reservation
Student Preferences for Types of Institutions in Two
Surveys:
1995 and 1996
1995*
1996**
Liberal arts college
Comprehensive college/university
Research university
Community college
0
20
40
Percent
* Question: What kind of institution do you hope to work for in your first job?
** Question: How attractive do you find various types of institutions?
60
80
Visit our Web Site
www.preparing-faculty.org