David E. Hardy

Characteristics and Perspectives of Faculty at Public 2-Year Colleges

This descriptive study makes use of the 1999 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF:99) public access database. It examines the demographic characteristics of full-time faculty in American public 2-year colleges at the close of the 20th century and how these characteristics differ across and within age groups. This study also examines levels of agreement between demographically subdivided groups of faculty members on opinions, institutional support and resources, and their degree of satisfaction with various aspects of the work environment. It also assesses the “gaps” that exist between various demographic groups. Implications for policy and practice, as well as recommendations for future research, are discussed.

Using Community College Classifications in Research: From Conceptual Model to Useful Tool

ABSTRACT This paper describes the methodology utilized to bring the 1993/1996 Katsinas-Lacey 2 year college classification system into the 21st century. The methodology involved using data from the 2000 United States Census and the National Center for Education Statistics Integrated Postsecondary Educational Data System surveys for the 2000–2001 and 2001–2002 academic years. The primary purpose of this work was to create an empirically supported, valid tool that can be used by researchers to create useful descriptive portraits of the universe of 2 year, publicly controlled institutions that primarily offer the associates degree. The study concludes with recommendations for further research. These include using the new Katsinas, Lacey, and Hardy 2005 Classification System to describe and discern similarities and differences within this particular institutional population by class and subclass within the model. This would be achieved through its application to existing national datasets, to researcher-designed surveys, and other research protocols.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS AFFECTING TEACHING IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES: AN ABUNDANCE OF FEELINGS AND LIMITED FACTS

A kaleidoscopic array of real and perceived unethical behaviors and practices involving teachers in higher education is making the news and troubling the faculty and administration of community colleges throughout the country. This article explores and reflects upon current and classic ethical issues faced by community college faculty members in their roles as teachers. Further, the article endeavors to ascertain what types of ethical guideposts are available for faculty members and what gaps may exist in the research on this subject. Specifically, the article addresses the following questions: (1) What are some of the major ethical issues currently confronting faculty in community colleges?; (2) What guidance - by type and by content - does the current literature offer to faculty when addressing the identified issues?; (3) What formal guidelines exist regarding professional ethics for faculty in community colleges and what similarities and differences are evident in the existing guidelines?; and (4) What research gaps exist regarding ethics and teaching in community colleges and how might such gaps be eliminated? Although a large body of theoretical and philosophical literature and institutional policies was found concerning the ethics of teaching, very little, if any, research on this issue appears to be currently underway. Thus, the article concludes with five specific suggestions for future research on the subject.

On-Campus Housing at Rural Community Colleges.

A certain “mythology” appears to exists within higher education that residence halls do not exist at community colleges. The reality is that residence halls do exist at community colleges, and they play an integral role in the fabric of the institutions that have them. This article identifies the number of rural-serving community colleges, and it reports selected results of the first national study on residence halls at community colleges in the United States. Focusing on rural-serving public community colleges, the motivation for community college involvement in operating on-campus housing is examined. Recommendations for future areas of needed research are discussed.

Rural Community Colleges

This chapter discusses the historic struggle to extend geographic access from before World War II to the end of the Baby Boom era (1965–1973), when states created/expanded community college systems to accommodate record numbers of new students. The significant differences in state-assigned missions, functions, organization and financing across rural, suburban, and urban community colleges today dates to this period. These differences impact rural colleges’ capacity to extend access and build sustainable regional innovation, with dramatic negative effect. The 2005 Basic Classification of Associate’s Colleges of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (CFAT) quantitatively analyzes National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)/Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) data on students, faculty, financial aid, and finances, disaggregating rural, suburban, and urban Associate’s Colleges. The relative invisibility of rural community colleges in national and state policymaking circles challenges these institutions perhaps as never before to find sufficient funding to fulfill their missions to provide postsecondary access, economic skill building, and cultural enrichment.

The Availability, Prospects, and Fiscal Potential of On-Campus Housing at Rural Community Colleges

Many rural community colleges have long provided on-campus housing. This article profiles the availability of housing at rural community colleges in 2001—2002 and 2005—2006, examines the factors that will continue to make on-campus housing an important service at rural institutions, and draws on 2005—2006 data from the Institutional Characteristics survey of the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System to analyze the potential importance of housing as a source of revenues for rural community colleges.

The Influence Theory: Factors That Influence the Transfer Advising Process

The transfer rate from community college to four-year institutions has been dropping for the past 70 years. In the most recent statistics, the national rate of transfer is 23% (Cohen & Brawer, 2008). In the state of Alabama the transfer rate is approximately 4%, and in the rural counties of Alabama the transfer rate hovers around 1%. Many studies have been conducted on the transfer process, but none have focused on the transfer process from a theoretical perspective. Most studies focus attention on disparate pieces of the transfer puzzle. To date, there is no overarching theory of the transfer process that will bring coherence to this field of study. This study views the transfer process through the experience of nine transfer advisors who serve students in 11 community colleges located in rural counties in the state of Alabama. The findings establish a substantive theory that will provide a contextual framework for researchers who wish to study specific features of the transfer process. The Influence Theory establishes five factors that play a prominent role in the transfer advising process: institutional, cultural, contextual, advisor, and student. This article concludes with implications for practice and future research.

Community College Retention and Access Issues: A View from the Field:

Drawing on Rankins 2008 study and literature on retention and community colleges, this study presents perceptions of community college Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and Chief Academic Officers (CAOs) in relation to issues affecting retention and access. Childcare, transportation, and funding concerns are examined.