South Carolina Advanced Technological Education

August 1999

 

 

Prepared by:

 

Kelly Spence, M.Ed.

Evaluation Intern, Western Michigan University

 

 

ABSTRACT                                                                                                                          

The 1999 South Carolina Advanced Technological Education First Time User’s Faculty Training Course Survey provides information regarding participants’ perceptions of training quality, applicability and convenience.  The survey requested respondents to indicate their agreement with a series of statements about the training program.  Additionally, respondents were asked to allocate the amount of time they suggest spending on each topic area and to respond to four open-ended questions.  Demographic information was also collected.

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS                                                                                                

           

ABSTRACT.... i

TABLE OF CONTENTS. ii

INTRODUCTION................... 1

METHODLOGY....................... 1

FINDINGS.... 1

Table 1. Frequencies for Primary Teaching Discipline of Respondents 2

Table 2. Percent of Time Recommended for each Session..... 4

CONCLUSION.......................... 5

APPENDICES 7

 

 

INTRODUCTION                                                                                                                 

 

The 1999 South Carolina Advanced Technological Education (SC ATE) First Time User’s Faculty Training Course Survey provides information regarding participants’ perceptions of training quality, applicability and convenience.   The survey was developed collaboratively by SC ATE Center of Excellence staff members and the Western Michigan University (WMU) evaluation intern.

 

METHODLOGY                                                                                                              

 

SC ATE Center of Excellence staff members and the WMU evaluation intern collaboratively developed a 21 item survey.  The survey consisted of 16 Likert items, one time-allocation item and four open-ended items.  A survey cover page collected information about the participants’ involvement in the ATE project, their involvement in the training program, their college affiliation, and their primary teaching discipline.   A copy of the survey and cover page was distributed to all participants in the First Time User’s Faculty Training Course with a letter explaining the purpose of the survey.  A follow-up e-mail requesting participation was sent to all participants who had not returned a completed survey by the survey due date.  Subsequently, non-participants were contact via phone and encouraged to complete a survey.  Of the 31 participants, 25 responded and two indicated lack of participation in the training as their reason for not participating in the study.  The resulting response rate is 86%.

 

FINDINGS                                                                                                                          

 

Respondent Demographics

 

The majority of the respondents (20 or 80%) fully participated in the faculty training as opposed to those who indicated they audited the training program (5 or 20%).  The average number of years involved with the ATE project was 3.04 (standard deviation 1.76).  As expected, the majority of participants primarily teach Communications, Engineering Technology or Mathematics with a fairly even distribution across disciplines.  The following table presents the primary teaching disciplines for the 25 respondents:

 

Table 1. Frequencies for Primary Teaching Discipline of Respondents

 

 

The majority of respondents (21 or 88%) were not previously involved with teaching a pilot class of the SC ATE PreET or core curriculum.  The mean number of training sessions attended was 4.20 (standard deviation 1.26), indicating that most respondents attended most of the training sessions.  The typical team had approximately 4 members (mean 3.68 standard deviation 1.25). 

 

Overall, respondents perceive the sessions as being appropriately paced.  Twenty-two respondents (92%) indicate that overall the pace of the training was just right.  One respondent (4.2%) considered the training pace too fast, while one respondent (4.2%) considered the pace too slow.

 

Likert Item Results

This section highlights survey findings that are exceptional; frequencies and percentages for every survey item are available as Appendix A. 

 

Nineteen (84%) respondents indicated they would recommend this course to other faculty members who anticipate teaching ATE courses.  This finding suggests that the majority of respondents were generally satisfied with the course.  The vast majority of respondents (24 or 96%) liked having the training sessions in a series rather than at once.  However, 15 (63%) respondents were unsure of or did not think remote delivery of the course was more effective than a traditional workshop would have been.  Given the geographic dispersion of training course participants and the desire to have a series of training sessions, a traditional workshop may not be feasible.

 

Overall the teaming aspects of the training were rated highly, with no one strongly disagreeing with any of the team-related items.  The majority of respondents (17 or 71%) indicated their team could adapt the remainder of the curriculum materials for delivery at their school.  Most respondents (19 or 79%) perceived working in teams as reinforcing interdisciplinary teaching methods.

 

While no area stood out as a problem area, a potential area for improvement is providing information and reducing anxiety about the new curriculum.  This concern is made evident by responses to survey items related to the new curriculum and in the large percentage of time allotted to the new curriculum (see items 4, 5 and 6 in Appendix A and Table 2 below).  Additionally, program leaders may want to consider devoting more time to assessment strategies (see item 8 in Appendix A and Table 2 below). 

 

Percent Time Allotment Item Results

 

Assessment and the new course curriculum had the highest average percent of time allotted by respondents (23.41%); followed closely by problem-based learning theory (19.55%) and communication and teaming skills (19.52%) (see Table 2).  The amount of time allocated by respondents does not necessarily indicate the importance of or benefit associated with the topic.  For instance, although faculty lessons learned was allocated the least amount of time (14.77%), it was frequently mentioned as the most beneficial aspect of the program in open-ended questions.  It is possible that assessment and the new curriculum were areas where faculty perceived a need for more instruction or assistance.

 

Table 2. Percent of Time Recommended for each Session

 

 

Open-ended Item Results

 

Open-ended questions were organized by theme and the frequency of similar responses was calculated to indicate the pervasiveness of themes across the respondents.  A full list of responses is provided as Appendix B. 

 

Seven respondents (29%) reported that the most beneficial aspect of the program was sharing of ideas with faculty members who have previously taught the ATE curriculum.  No single element of the program was repeatedly mentioned in the responses to an open-ended question regarding aspects of the program, which were the least beneficial.  Twelve respondents (50%) mentioned a formal means of sharing ideas as an ongoing activity that that would help them become better instructors.  The sharing of ideas was suggested as one of the following three initiatives: (1) networking across campuses with other faculty members (no formal grouping); (2) teaming across campuses with other faculty members (teams grouped by discipline or experience); and/or (3) mentoring with faculty members who have already taught the new curriculum.  Teleconferencing was suggested as a possible means for communicating across campuses.  Additionally, respondents mentioned the need for more help with assessment; perhaps in the form of a workshop. 

 

Respondent Suggestions for Improvement

 

Respondent suggestions for improvement are provided below and grouped by theme when possible. The number of respondents mentioning this or a similar idea is in parenthesis.  The most frequently mentioned area for improvement was in sending course materials well before class time.  Suggestions mentioned by more than one respondent include: spend less time reporting back to the group; offering specific strategies; and scheduling meeting times at least a week apart.  All respondents’ comments regarding program improvement are included below.

 

 

 

CONCLUSION                                                                                                                

 

Overall, respondents were satisfied with the course and would recommend the course to fellow faculty members.  Teaming aspects of the course and hearing from faculty who pilot tested the curriculum were particularly agreeable.  In terms of logistics, the participants liked having the sessions in a series rather than as one session and the sessions were paced appropriately. 

 

Assessment and the new curriculum stood out as problem areas for the respondents.  Program staff may want to consider providing additional instruction and/or reference materials for these topics.  Respondents suggested providing course materials further in advance of classes and allowing more time between classes for teamwork.  If course materials are provided well in advance, it may be a good idea to have a plan in place for accommodating participants who have misplaced their course materials. 

 

In response to an item requesting suggestions for follow-up activities respondents mentioned needing time to try out the new curriculum before making suggestions.  It may be beneficial to contact participants after their first semester teaching the new curriculum to determine what areas they require further assistance in and topics or situations for which they were not adequately prepared. 

 

 

APPENDICES                                                                                                                  

 

            Appendix A: Survey Questions, Frequencies and Percentages

 

            Appendix B: Responses to Open-ended Questions