Academic Leaders and Faculty Developers: Creating an Institutional Culture That Values Teaching

Abstract

In recent years, a great deal has been said and written about the need to improve teaching in the academy, especially in large research universities. College presidents, national associations representing higher education, private foundations, and individual faculty scholars all have challenged faculty, chairs, deans, campus administrators, and faculty developers to work together to improve support for undergraduate teaching and learning (Bok. Despite such calls for collaborative efforts to improve undergraduate education, faculty developers still often feel alone in a milieu that does not value teaching and frequently perceive a lack of support from academic leaders, particularly the central administration. Administrators, on the other hand, often recognize the need to improve institutional support for teaching, but are at a loss as to how to effectively intervene to change the environment.

Mediating Effect between Supportive Culture and Job Satisfaction in Administrative Services at Higher Education Institutions

“…Trivellas and Dargenidou (2009) indicated that specific cultural archetypes are linked with different administrative services in higher education. The results of a case study from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst to “encourage a culture on campus that values working” has emphasized how important it is for the campus community—especially faculty—to feel that the administration clearly places a high value on working (Aitken & Sorcinelli, 1994, p. 64). A supportive culture may reduce the likelihood of the occurrence of employees' negative experiences.…”

A Culture of Teaching: Policy, Perception, and Practice in Higher Education

“…Significant human and financial resources are being invested in pedagogical reform efforts, but little evidence exists to indicate their widespread adoption. This circumstance suggests that scholars may be relying on anecdotes, experiences, and personal beliefs when it comes to deciding whether to respond to their campus's appeals for changes in how they teach their students (Aitken and Sorcinelli 1994).…”

The Four Rs: Guiding CTLs with Responsiveness, Relationships, Resources, and Research

“…Relationships are core to effective CTLs, whether vertical, lateral, internal, or external (Little, ). Connections with high‐level administrators are clearly critical to garner resources, and networking and communication skills are needed to maintain close connections with central leadership (Aitkin & Sorcinelli, ; Seldin, ). Likewise, lateral relationships with academic departments and other centers enable a CTL to expand its reach.…”