They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations. 33 nd - PDF document

3/6/2014 Fac acul ulty Perspectives on on Dec Decision ons to o Teac ach in n Fi First-Year ar Ex Expe peri rience Progr ogram ams “They are happy men whose natures sort with their vocations.” 33 nd Annual Conference on The First-Year Experience 17 February 2014 | San Diego, California -Francis Bacon (1561-1626) First-Year Experience Programs Kansas State University • Over 24,300 students from all 50 • Retention benefits states and more than 100 countries • Student success, student learning, degree attainment • University Profile • First-Year Seminars (of various kinds) • Public Land Grant • But also now common reading programs, learning • Research University with high research communities, engaged advising, peer mentoring, activity early alert programs, and more • Long-term strategic plan goal: become “ one of the nation's top 50 public research u niversities” 1

3/6/2014 www.k-state.edu/first History Programs • 2008-09 CAT Communities First Year Seminars Initial Pilot Study of FYS Program • 2010 Launch of K-State First, Creation of KSBN and CAT Communities • 2011-13 Development, Changes, Success, Growth K-State Book Network Guide to Personal Success Overarching Research Question Notable Features • Growth in numbers of classes, communities, and What factors contribute to faculty “buy - in” for students served FYE programs? • Solid gains in retention, degree attainment, and student satisfaction • Student participation is not required (though all first-year students receive the common book) • Faculty involvement is also voluntary , though some are asked by their Department Heads 2

3/6/2014 Prior Research on FYE Faculty Competing Commitments: Teaching in FYE Programs at Research Schools • Personal, professional, political effects of participation on instructors (Wanca-Thibualt, Shepherd & Staley, 2002) • Institutional priorities • Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation factors associated with • Conflict with institutional priorities continuing to teach in first year programs (Soldner, Lee & Duby, • Implicit or explicit institutional messages about primary 2004) responsibilities (e.g., Backes-Gellner & Schlinghoff, 2010; Hardre & • How teachers of first year seminars transfer their own Kollman, 2012; Leisyte, Enders, & de Boer,2009; Serwo, 2000) learning (e.g., teaching approaches) to other courses • Zero-sum game (e.g., Eimers, 1997) (McClure, Atikinson, & Wills, 2008; Fidler, Neururer-Rotholz, & Richardson, 1999) • Examining faculty experiences in this area may enable • While prior research reveals interesting themes, we the development of more successful first-year further examined faculty buy-in within the context of programs. additional relevant psychological theories. Theoretical Framework Social Identity Theory • Social identity refers to the way individuals define • Psychological theories on themselves in terms of group membership • Defining oneself on the basis of vocation is quite common motivation and identity Self Determination (Deaux, 2001) may help us understand: Theory • Social identity theory (Tajfel, 1978; 2010) suggests that social Social Identity Intrinsic • How faculty handle the Theory identities are a crucial part of self-image, and a Motivation Identity balance between teaching (Self & Social) valuable source of positive feelings and research • Social identity may affect how faculty decide to balance Understanding • What leads to participation FYE teaching and research responsibilities Faculty in first-year programs • We predict that faculty in K-State First will strongly identify as teachers, despite their position at a research institution. 3

3/6/2014 Self-Determination Theory Intrinsic Motivation • Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, • Associated with high personal standards of 2009) asserts that all humans have basic needs achievement and an emphasis on personal effort • Feeling competent, and experiencing autonomy (e.g., Blumenfield, Kempler, & Krajcik, 2006) • Leads individuals to engage in behaviors because and relatedness in professional activities will increase intrinsic motivation they enjoy them • K-State First faculty will demonstrate active • We predict that faculty who continue in the K- decisions to engage in first-year programs as a State First program will provide responses that way to meet their personal and professional demonstrate high intrinsic motivation. needs. The Current Study Survey Procedures • We predict that faculty in K-State First who • We sent electronic invitations to the 105 individuals continue to teach in the program will demonstrate who have taught in the K-State First program • Strong identification as teachers • Participants completed the online survey • Decision to continue in the program voluntarily • High intrinsic motivation • We sent reminder emails periodically • We examined these questions using both • 77 individuals (73%) participated in the study quantitative and qualitative measures of faculty experience. 4

3/6/2014 Domains Assessed Teaching Background • Factors Related to Faculty Motivations, Identities, • The sample consisted largely of experienced and Self-Concepts: teachers • Teaching Background • The majority were tenured faculty members • Decisions to Teach in the KSF program • Experiences and Perceptions of Teaching in the • Number of years they had been teaching: KSF program • Me = 14, M = 16.58, SD = 12.58 (years overall) • Self-Concepts as Teachers • Me = 9, M = 11.90, SD = 10.83 (years at Kansas State) • 86% had 5 of more years of teaching experience overall • 74% had 5 of more years of teaching experience at Kansas State Decisions to Teach in KSF Why They Decided to Teach in KSF 59% gave the lowest rating for how difficult the initial decision Percent was for them (M = 1.90, SD = 1.55 • Most common reasons (from free responses): on a 1 to 9 scale). 70 • The opportunity to teach first-year students 60 • The class structure (e.g., size, type) 50 • The reputation and philosophy of KSF 40 30 20 10 0 Was Invited Suggested by Colleague 5

3/6/2014 Continuing to Teach in KSF Why They Decided to Teach in KSF • Overall, three times as many participants continued to teach • “I thought the program was intriguing . It has a in KSF great mission to engage first year students , and the learning community idea was exciting.” • 54 participants made the decision to continue to teach in KSF • 56% gave the lowest rating for how difficult the decision was for them • “Opportunity to reach first-year students in a • M = 2.28, SD = 2.01 (on a 1 to 9 scale) different environment, focus on learning in unique ways, have a smaller classroom.” • 18 participants made the decision not to continue to teach in • “The opportunity to …. work with other faculty KSF • They reported this decision was more difficult for them across campus to learn more about best practices • M = 3.28, SD = 1.00 (on a 1 to 9 scale) in teaching and learning.” • 9 of them indicated they did not continue because they left K-State Experiences Teaching in KSF Experiences Teaching in KSF These mean values significantly These mean values significantly exceeded the midpoint of the exceeded the midpoint of the Mean Ratings response scale, t s > 11.02, p s < Mean Ratings response scale, t s > 3.40, p s ≤ .001. .001, for all but Special. 9 9 8 7 7 6 5 5 4 3 3 2 1 1 Pride Belongingness 1 = Very Negative to 9 = Very Positive Special Connected to Students 1 = Not at all Successful to 9 = Very Successful Connected to KSF Faculty 6

3/6/2014 Why They Continued to Teach in KSF Why They Continued to Teach in KSF • Most common reasons (from free responses): • “I loved teaching classes in this way! I loved the • Enjoyed teaching first-year students connection with students, and I had better results • Liked the course • Recognized the value of KSF from the students.” • “I was inspired by the program’s mission and liked the contact with other enthusiastic teachers .” Perceptions of KSF How to Attract Faculty to KSF These mean values were significantly different, t = 8.39, p < .001. Both ratings teachers exceeded the midpoint of the • Most common suggestions (from free responses): response scale, t s > 3.87, p s < Mean Ratings .001. • Focused recruiting (e.g., invitations) 9 • Improve campus presence (e.g., disseminate 8 7 information) 6 • Provide (and emphasize) benefits (e.g., money) 5 4 3 2 1 Perceived effectiveness of the average KSF teacher Perceived effectiveness of the average K-State teacher 7