The Adjunct Faculty Handbook

Handbooks

Edited by: Lorri E. Cooper & Bryan A. Booth

  • Citations
  • Add to My List
  • Text Size

  • Chapters
  • Front Matter
  • Back Matter
  • Subject Index
  • Copyright

    View Copyright Page

    Preface

    Since the publication of The Adjunct Faculty Handbook in 1996, enrollment at institutions of higher education has greatly expanded. To keep up with these higher enrollments, institutions have increased the use of adjunct faculty to not only meet the volume demand of course offerings but also to

    • Bring subject matter experts with real-world experience into the classroom
    • Offer program specialties or minors particularly attractive to students
    • Enhance the curriculum with innovative ideas and innovative teaching techniques
    • Encourage faculty development through collaboration

    The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) reported that the percentage of adjunct faculty has risen from around 400,000 or 42% of total instructional faculty (NCES, 2007) to almost 670,000 or almost 49% of total instructional faculty (NCES, 2008). Sources such as the American Association of University Professors place the percentage of contingent faculty overall at 69% for two- and four-year institutions. Whether the figure is almost 50% or as high as 70% (dependent on classification of adjunct faculty members), there is no dispute as to the continuing institutional dependence on adjunct faculty by colleges and universities.

    Adjunct faculty have multiple reference terms—adjunct, contingent faculty, part-time faculty—individually assigned by each institution of higher education. In their seminal book on “the invisible faculty,” Gappa and Leslie (1993) formulated a typology to help define the motivation and lifestyle of adjunct faculty:

    • Specialist, Experts, Professionals: Adjunct faculty work full-time in a profession and teach to remain connected to their professional network.
    • Freelancers: Adjunct faculty have more than one part-time position, or they may even have a full-time position at another college and teach a course for another.
    • Career Enders: Adjunct faculty may be near the end or at the end of their career and want to supplement their income or give back to the field and maintain contacts with like professionals.
    • Aspiring Academics: Adjunct faculty may be early in their academic career, looking for experience and the possibility of a full-time academic position.

    Since Gappa and Leslie's book, the increase in adjunct faculty has made all four types much more visible (and less “invisible”) in higher education. The increased “professionalization” of adjunct faculty (e.g., unions and associations for adjunct faculty) has signaled to adjuncts, learning institutions, and to students the importance and value of adjunct faculty.

    All types of adjunct faculty described and noted earlier, and throughout the book, can benefit from advice and approaches for teaching practices that enhance and increase effective learning. So, too, department chairs, course heads, program coordinators, and academic administrators are in need of guidelines, ideas, and suggestions for fostering engagement and professional development of adjunct faculty. The resulting effect of improving the entire adjunct experience for both adjuncts and administrators along with enhancing and developing skills among adjunct faculty will improve the overall quality of education provided for students. And that is the intent of this handbook.

    Specifically, this handbook is designed to help the following:

    • Full-time and part-time adjunct faculty (and general faculty) who want to improve their teaching and provide a richer learning environment for their students
    • Program, department, and school administrators who hire and manage adjunct faculty and graduate student instructors
    • Those in university centers of teaching excellence who provide resources for professional development and enrichment of teaching and learning (new to the second edition)

    For the second edition, the foundational purpose of the edited text remained the same—a well-organized, easily understood, concise reference and guide, highlighting key information that instructors need to succeed in today's higher education teaching and learning environment. With the fundamental aim ensured, we next posed the obvious question: What has changed for adjunct faculty focused on teaching and learning since the publication of the first edition?

    The obvious answer—technology. The rapid infusion and application of technology in our higher education classrooms of today, whether face-to-face or online, have significantly altered the expectations of students along with the range of designs for teaching methods. Thus, specific to the second edition, we have provided updated chapters on administrative guidelines, teaching and learning strategies, and evaluation of students. We have also introduced new and what we believe are essential and relevant topics concerning technology and professional development of adjunct faculty. Most distinctive, the handbook concludes with thought-leadership about the impact of future trends on the intersection of teaching and technology.

    Some overlap of information occurs among the chapters as they were written by different authors and designed to stand alone for reference purposes. The structure of each chapter and style of writing also differ, due to the purpose of the chapter and the background of the author(s).

    Organization

    Chapter 1, “Preparing to Teach: Considerations of Administration, Students, Technology, and Educational Results,” covers essential administrative details and guidelines for ensuring successful teaching-learning experiences. Everything from signing a teaching contract to coordinating class meeting details to managing student administrative procedures is presented in narrative and checklist form.

    Chapter 2, “Technology in Education,” addresses both fundamental uses of technology in the classroom of today's “digital native” and differences adjunct faculty may expect to encounter whether teaching face-to-face or online. Examples of digital tools to assist in the development of media-rich teaching are described.

    Chapter 3, “Environment of Learning: Connecting With Students,” and Chapter 4, “Teaching Methods: Preparation and Application,” present a critical and in-depth review of student learning theory and associated best teaching methods appropriate for any adjunct or full-time instructor. Most notable, here you will find richly detailed sections on dialogue as a teaching technique along with developing lesson plans.

    Chapter 5, “Professional Development of the Adjunct Faculty,” offers multiple suggestions and resources for professional development efforts of adjunct faculty and their commitment to excellent teaching. Ideas on institutional activities and low-cost resources are suggested for new teaching centers now established at most institutions.

    Chapter 6, “Evaluation of Student Performance,” reviews methods for evaluating student performance along with a discussion of academic integrity that highlights the impact of recent technology on violations and suggestions for prevention.

    Chapter 7, “Future Trends: Network Technologies and Adjunct Faculty,” discusses ways in which adjunct faculty can develop and grow their technology-based communication and networking skills to enable greater connections to students and colleagues. A model for choosing communication channels and networking modes is offered.

    Ancillaries

    For an electronic version of the Sample Lesson Plan in Appendix C and the Course Syllabus from Appendix D, please see the following URL: http://www.sagepub.com/cooperappendices.

    References
    Gappa, J. M., & Leslie, D. W. (1993). The invisible faculty. Improving the status of part-timers in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. (2007). Digest of education statistics. Retrieved August 31, 2009, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d08/tables/dt08_248.asp
    National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. (2008). Digest of education statistics: 2008. Retrieved August 31, 2009, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d08/tables/dt08_245.asp?referrer=report

    Note from the Editors of the First Edition

    I was not surprised when we received a call from SAGE Publications to write a new edition for The Adjunct Faculty Handbook, a book my colleague, Dr. Neal Chalofsky, and I conceived and edited over 10 years ago.

    Over that period of time, the entire adjunct faculty arena has exploded with numerous texts, journals, conventions, newsletters, and even union activity. We deans and chairs rely heavily on outside professionals to round out our schedules and degree plans. A nonpermanent, experienced workforce provides the kind of flexibility and outreach that today's universities demand, and managing and developing such extended faculty demands an entire set of guidelines and interactions.

    Becoming an adjunct professor is now an actual career choice for experienced, degreed professionals who wish to expand their full-time jobs, extend their consulting work, stay in touch with research, passionately teach, or give back to the community. Certain adjunct faculty members have been able to cobble together a full-time slate of teaching by practicing at several universities at once. These adjunct faculty are highly prized as they establish relationships with various full-time faculty and students.

    Unfortunately, when the call for a new edition came, Neal and I were knee-deep in other writing projects. We quickly realized there were many talented individuals who could take this project on. We interviewed a few outstanding professors and administrators and decided upon the wonderful team of Dr. Lorri Cooper and Dr. Bryan Booth. Their combined expertise in recent adjunct faculty hiring, development, and coaching made them uniquely perfect for this assignment.

    Lorri and Bryan have done a stunning job of updating the original text with the latest methods, theories, and approaches in technology, methodology, measurement, personal development, and administrative concerns. This new edition should be read by all deans, chairs, program directors, adjunct faculty, and even full-time faculty. The skill sets are transferable to all academic populations. Creating a cohesive academic community, with all parties supporting and learning together, is the key.

    Neal and I are disappointed that we could not work on this book ourselves, but we are delighted to introduce this new version. Happy teaching!

    VirginiaBianco-Mathis
    NealChalofsky

    Acknowledgments

    Becoming editors of the second edition of The Adjunct Faculty Handbook was only possible because of the foundational work done by the editors of the first edition: Virginia Bianco-Mathis and Neal Chalofsky. Stepping into their role was made easier due to the structure they established, the range and application of the topics chosen, and the tone set by outstanding contributors. Their book has endured and we hope to continue their success. We have been honored by both their belief in our capabilities and their support of our efforts.

    Quite simply, the chapter contributors make this handbook. We benefitted from their expertise and their willingness to commit their time and understanding of important topics to and about adjunct faculty. They delivered chapters reflecting well-reasoned, thoughtful, knowledge areas integrated with practical advice and solutions grounded in their own experiences. We are delighted and thank them for everything they did.

    Our universities have encouraged our time and energy with this book. In particular, we thank Jim Ryerson, dean, and Virginia Bianco-Mathis, management department chair, at the School of Business Administration, Marymount University; Michael Frank, dean, and Michael Evanchik, associate dean at the Graduate School of Management & Technology, University of Maryland University College.

    We also wish to thank certain colleagues: at Marymount University, Catherine England, Amy Dufrane, and Ken Yusko, and at University of Maryland University College, Bryan's colleagues in the Doctor of Management Program. We all spent time as adjunct faculty prior to full-time careers in academia, engendering a special affection and commitment to the success of all adjuncts and a special appreciation for how adjuncts we work with today (and in the future) influence our own thinking and challenge us to strive for excellence as part of our contributions to our students' learning and our institutions' mission.

    At SAGE, Diane McDaniel and Ashley Conlon were our mainstays through the formulation and production of the book. Thank you both for your editorial guidance (and correction!). We also thank our copy editor, Tina Hardy, for her precision and “caring” use of the red pen. Clearly, you are experienced at dealing with the best and sometimes challenging authors and editors.

    Our families and close friends cheered us on with well wishes and the occasional “toast” as we completed each stage in the process and whenever we required an extra “push.” Bryan offers special thanks to his wife Katharina and his children Alex and Emma for their support throughout. Lorri offers a thank-you to Chatsworth for his patience and understanding.

    Finally … the best part of our endeavor has been the resulting collegial friendship we have built—freely sharing ideas and best practices, supporting one another in these and other administrative efforts—retaining our sense of humor through it all. True collaboration results in something much larger, more elegant, and rather different than the individual ideas, critiques, and visions offered throughout the process. This book has been such for us. We are most grateful for the resulting outcome.

    Lorri E.Cooper
    Bryan A.Booth
  • Appendix A: Administrative and Program Details to Consider Before the Term Begins

    Program Administration
    • ___ Do you have a copy of your contract signed by the provost or academic dean indicating responsibilities and payment?
    • ___ What are the date, time, and place of your class meetings? Have you prearranged any scheduling conflicts or makeup classes?
    • ___ Do you have copies of requisite university adjunct or faculty handbooks plus the university's academic guidelines and policies?
    • ___ Have you spoken with your university contact? Do you know how to obtain whatever support you will need?
    • ___ Have you obtained your university ID?
    Class Details
    • ___ Where is the classroom located, and what parking is available? Have you obtained any necessary permits?
    • ___ Have you visited your classroom? Will you need to rearrange anything to accommodate your teaching methods?
    • ___ Have you addressed personal safety concerns for yourself and the students both coming to and going from class?
    • ___ Have accommodations been made both in the building and in the classroom for all students?
    • ___ Do you know how to contact safety and security personnel in the event of an emergency?
    • ___ Where is the library (or lab) located, and what are the hours of operation?
    • ___ Have you accessed your electronic course information? Are you able to post information for students?
    • ___ Have you activated the course to enable student access and capability?
    Student Administration
    • ___ Do you have a general knowledge of registration procedures and add/drop procedures?
    • ___ Have you been given a class roster or do you have electronic access to one? Have you confirmed actual enrollment information?
    • ___ Have you been given information regarding the university's grading system and procedures, especially the deadline when final grades are due and how to submit them?
    • ___ Are you aware of the procedures and expectations for teaching evaluations?
    Adjunct Support
    • ___ Have you made arrangements for any instructional media materials you will require?
    • ___ Are there any provisions for administrative support? Do you know how to arrange for them?
    • ___ Are you familiar with the university's library and the resources available pertaining to your subject? Will the library offer you or your students assistance with research? Do you know the procedure for placing materials on reserve?
    • ___ Have you found contact information and procedures for electronic support of your online course activities?

    Appendix B: Checklist for Group Facilitation

    Leader Responsibilities
    • ___ 1. Arranges seating of participants so that everyone can see and hear each other.
    • ___ 2. States and confirms the agenda. Obtains answers to the following:
      • What is the objective of this discussion?
      • How much time should be spent on each topic?
    • ___ 3. States and/or confirms “ground rules” to be followed. Typical Ground Rules for Group Discussion:
      • All points of view will be accepted and posted: criticism (evaluation) is ruled out until later.
      • Interruptions will be “gatekept.”
      • Silence is okay; one needs time to think.
      • Disagreement is okay as long as it's about ideas, not personalities.
      • Evaluation of the content and the process comes last.
    • ___ 4. Elicits ideas, opinions, and feelings. Uses recognition, silence, or coaxing, or some combination, to encourage participation. “What do you think about the topic?”
    • ___ 5. Posts and confirms key points generated. List publicly brief summaries of what has been said. Quickly prints a summary statement of what has been said (in own words) and inquires, “Is this correct?”
    • ___ 6. Elicits clarification or elaboration. Asks for examples or illustrations. “Could you give us an example or illustration or help us understand?”
    • ___ 7. Recognizes or encourages contributions. Listens attentively to others' ideas. Reinforces them by adding own ideas or approves them verbally or nonverbally. Uses a nod of the head, a smile, or says, “That's an interesting point.”
    • ___ 8. States or reflects feelings. Describes own concerns or feelings about what is happening or restates what he or she thinks others are feeling and asks for confirmation. “It seems to me that we're confused. Is that true? Remember the topic we're discussing is …”
    • ___ 9. Gatekeeps. Asks someone to hold off introducing a new topic while another is being discussed; intervenes to prevent people from talking at the same time. “Hold it! Jane, please finish what you were saying. Then we'll get to you, Sam.”
    • ___ 10. Tests consensus. Checks with others to see if they agree with points made or with conclusions stated or to see if everyone is ready to proceed to another topic, issue, or step in problemsolving sequence. “Are there any more ideas about this topic? Are we ready to evaluate or analyze what it means now?”
    • ___ 11. Summarizes. Pulls together related ideas; tries to draw conclusion. “Let's see, from what's been posted, it seems that we agree that …”
    • ___ 12. Analyzes, evaluates. Asks “Why?” about what has been posted; inquires about supporting assumptions, values, and facts. “Why do you think you felt this way about this topic?”
    • ___ 13. Derives principles or generalizations. Guides others into either discovering basic principles or transferring conclusions to new settings. “What basic principles seem to be at work here? How does this apply to your field”

    Participant Responsibilities (In addition to assisting with the above)

    • ___ 14. Gives information or opinions. Offers facts or generalizations; makes suggestions honestly, forcefully, and spontaneously. “Here's what I see as the key point of ….”
    • ___ 15. Clarifies or elaborates. Clears up confusion by restating (in his or her own words) what someone else has said or by asking for or giving examples or illustrations. “Let me see if I understand. Is this what you're trying to say?”
    • ___ 16. Accepts others' ideas or disagreements as ideas to be explored, not personal attacks. Looks for a positive side. “You certainly see things differently. But that's interesting. Let's see ….”
    • ___ 17. Ignores aggressiveness, attempts to impress, and competitive behavior, or points out their dysfunctional and counterproductive consequences. “When people dominate the discussion, I feel frustrated and soon ‘tune out.’”

    Appendix C: Sample Lesson Plan

    Submitted by: XXXXXXXXX

    E-mail: XXXXXXXXXXXXX

    School/Univcrsity/Affiliation: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

    Date: XXX

    College Level: Freshman English

    Subject(s):

    • Computer Science

    Description: This lesson serves to develop students' Internet skills in researching a familiar topic. The lesson also serves to reinforce knowledge acquired about the topic.

    Goals: The students will be able to

    • Explain why Shakespeare is so popular and important
    • Appreciate the use of language, become comfortable with reading it, and understand how it enhances the readings

    Objective(s): The students will be able to

    • Gain experience in theater and public speaking
    • Recognize how Shakespeare builds his characters and analyze their motives
    • Develop their creative writing skills
    • Become more acquainted with the computer by finding information about Shakespeare on the World Wide Web
    • Type their play, e-mail ideas to group members, create a presentation on the World Wide Web, and finally create a class web page
    Materials:
    • Shakespeare book
    • Handout for group instruction
    Procedure:

    Activities: Handout already on desk

    • Attention getter

      On board—September 27, 1594

      “Welcome to the London Theatre! You have just been selected as the talented actors and actresses to perform one of the plays by the wonderful new playwright William Shakespeare.”

    • Instructions
      • Two plays are Much Ado About Nothing and Romeo and Juliet—both we have read in class.
      • You will be working in groups for this activity, but you will be doing very little interaction face to face with your group for the first few days.
      • You will e-mail ideas to your group members while you are searching the World Wide Web for information on Shakespeare, his plays, his life, and so on.
      • Be sure to e-mail your group members with links to the great web pages that you find.
      • After obtaining the e-mail addresses of your group members, e-mail back and forth regarding the following:
    • Pick one act that your group will perform for this class.
    • Decide who plays each character.
      • Be sure to pick the person who can best represent each character.
      • The purpose of this is to recognize the distinguishing qualities of each character and attempt to portray these qualities in your chosen act.
    • Create a new ending for the scene to work on creative writing skills.
      • This is what will be acted out in class.
      • Be sure to keep the characters' personalities intact.
    • Keep these notes in mind regarding evaluation.
      • I will grade you on how well you seem to understand the characters through the acting out of the scene and by how well you can keep the personality the same in the new ending.
      • I will also grade you on your imaginative ending.
      • You will be graded on how well you keep on task.

    In addition

    • Each group will evaluate another group on character understanding and creativity. I will grade you on your evaluation of another group.
    • You will complete a self-evaluation after you have performed your act.

    All of the above activities should take about 15 minutes.

    • Separation into groups
      • Raise hands to decide who goes in each group. Allow students to decide which play they would like to be in, putting about five people in each group.
      • This will take about 5 to 10 minutes.
    • Assignment for the day
      • By the end of the class period each person should turn in
        • A typed paper with the names of group members and their e-mail addresses
        • As many web addresses as you found today on Shakespeare, ranking them from the best to the worst and tell why
        • Intended act of performance
        • Who plays what character
        • Ideas for new endings
      • We will work on this project for one week and perform it beginning next Monday.

    This activity should take the remainder of class time.

    For disabled students

    All students can participate in this activity. If moving around and acting is difficult for one person, he or she can have another part as something a bit less mobile. If speaking is the problem, there are parts with no speaking involved. Any problem that is encountered can be taken care of.

    Being that this is a group activity, everyone will be able to work together and produce a quality performance; try to involve everyone.

    Shakespeare

    We have read two of Shakespeare's plays: Much Ado About Nothing and Romeo and Juliet.

    Your objective

    To act out one act from either play, analyzing the characters' motives. But rather than just doing standard Shakespeare, your group will create a new and creative ending for the act.

    • While e-mailing between your group members
      • Pick one act that your group will perform for this class.
      • Decide who plays each character.
    • Be sure to pick the person who can best represent each character.
    • The purpose of this is to recognize the distinguishing qualities of each character and attempt to portray these qualities in your chosen act.
      • Create a new ending for the scene to work on creative writing skills.
    • This is what will be acted out in class.
    • Be sure to keep the characters' personalities intact.
    Timeline
    Today:E-mail group members to begin getting organized (an assignment will be given in class).
    Tuesday:Work on this project in your groups using the word processor to type your ideas. Each group member must use the computer for the same amount of time.
    Wednesday:We will discuss group ideas with the rest of the class. Each group is responsible for a 2–3 minute computer-based presentation of its ideas on this assignment this far.
    Thursday:Writer of the Week.
    Friday:Final touches, practice acting.
    Monday:Begin performances.
    Tuesday:Performances.
    Wednesday:Guest speaker, school computer specialist Mr. Carpenter, will teach us how to create a web page and why it is important.
    Thursday:Begin creating a web page that contains all of the plays that were written by this class.

    Be as creative as you can with this. Have fun with it. Feel free to use props, music, or anything else you can think of to make your performance better.

    If your group needs help with this project, I will be available after school until 4:30, before school beginning at 7:00, during 5th period, and of course during class. Do not feel bad about asking for help!

    Assessment:
    • Teacher Evaluation

      Students will be graded on the following:

      • How well they understand the characters through the acting out of the scene
      • How well they can keep the personality the same in the new ending
      • How imaginative their ending is
      • How well they can keep on task
    • Peer Evaluations
      • Each group will evaluate another group on character understanding and creativity. I will grade you on your evaluation of another group.
      • Each student will complete a self-evaluation on himself or herself and on his or her group after performing the act.

    (Because students will be evaluated by their group members, it would be a good idea if everyone in the group participated.)

    Useful Internet Resources:

    Appendix D: Course Syllabus

    University Course Syllabus

    Broad Purpose of Course

    The long dominant organizational model of competitive, individual works has changed drastically in the past 20 years, replaced with a team-based, collaborative model. Driven by new management models, quality, information technology, emotional intelligence, and the growing popularity of team coaching, workers are now expected to function, formally or informally, as intact work groups or teams. This course combines current theories of team development and performance with the practice of team facilitation and coaching. It is intended to help managers and specialists become more competent in understanding, developing, and coaching teams.

    Course Objectives
    Upon Successful Completion of This Course, You Should Be Able to Do the Following:
    • Discuss theories of team development and dynamics, and relate these theories to practice.
    • Discuss how the components of emotional and social intelligence contribute to team performance.
    • Given illustrative problems and scenarios, diagnose and choose appropriate interventions for group problem resolution.
    • Effectively demonstrate effective group facilitation skills and strategies.
    • Understand and apply a data collection method for assessing team performance, analyze and summarize that data, feed it back to the team or a team representative, and mutually plan an appropriate development or performance strategy.
    • Conduct a graduate level literature review on an area of team development and performance.
    Teaching Method

    Given the nature of this content, this will be a highly experiential course. Much of the class will be devoted to a range of adult, team-based learning methods. These include interactive discussions, participant skill development in teams, role play, assessments, case studies, video, and presentations.

    Assignments and Grading Policy
    Assignment 1 (25%)
    Class Participation and Practice Facilitation

    This class meets over six Saturdays and is heavily experiential. You are expected to attend every class unless you discuss it with me in advance. Under no circumstances will a student be allowed to miss more than one Saturday class. A significant portion of the class participation is oriented toward preparing the student to demonstrate facilitation skills in a class activity. Therefore, it is important that you be present to learn and practice the drills to prepare you for this activity. In addition, you will be taking the Team Emotional and Social Intelligence Survey (TESI), an online team emotional intelligence assessment. It is essential that you be in class to get the instructions for this assessment and for getting the feedback. If you are absent, you must get the instructions and feedback from another student.

    Assignment 2 (50%)
    Group Team Assessment Project
    • Work in teams of two to four to accomplish this assignment.
    • Identify a real performing team. The team can be from your workplace, place of worship, or community.
    • Contract with the team (first preference), team leader, or other contact to conduct an assessment of the team. In discussions with the team or contact, determine what kind of data collection method to use.
    • Conduct the data collection, assuring anonymity but not confidentiality.
    • Analyze and summarize the data into useable and actionable themes. Determine appropriate recommendations for team interventions.
    • Conduct a feedback meeting with the team and or contact. Plan with the team what next steps should be.
    • Write a report (5–10 pp.) of these steps for the instructor. Include a copy of the data collection instrument or assessment and the data summary. Do not include the raw data. A grading point evaluation sheet will be distributed separately.
    Assignment 3 (25%)
    Individual Literature Review and Small-Group Presentation

    Each student will choose a topic related to the subject matter of the course, research the topic, and prepare a literature review for distribution in class. Topics selected may include but are not limited to the following:

    • Stages of group development
    • Emotional Intelligence in teams
    • Team coaching
    • Team facilitation skills and models
    • Team data collection methods
    • Facilitative roles
    • Models of group decision making
    • Self-managed work teams
    • Evaluating team performance
    • Team leading versus team coaching
    • Managing virtual teams
    • Team-based organizations—the latest research
    • Team assessment tools
    • Diversity issues in teams
    • Managing conflict in teams
    • Appreciative Inquiry application in teams
    • Personality type and teams
    • Teams and culture

    You should make enough copies of your literature review for everyone in the class. Your literature review should cover 10 to 15 articles or books. You are not expected to read each book. You should read several synopses and book reviews to be able to discuss them with the class. However, you should make attempts to read the articles in your literature review. You will describe your literature review in small groups. You will also facilitate a brief exercise of your choosing in your small group that pertains to your literature review. This exercise may be a skill development exercise, an assessment, a game, a role-play, a facilitated discussion, and so forth. A grading point evaluation sheet will be distributed separately.

    Grade-Point Scale
    To attain a grade of:The minimum point value is:
    A93
    A−90
    B+87
    B84
    B−80
    C+77
    C75
    C−72
    Class Schedule
    SessionTopics
    May 30
    • Introductions
    • Course overview and requirements
    • Course projects: Discussion and selection
    • Groups and teams—overview of a working model
    • Instructions on TESI
    • Facilitation: Basics
    • Tools and techniques
    June 6
    • TESI debrief and discussion
    • Emotional Intelligence in teams
    • Data collection, analysis, and feedback in teams
    • Practice in team assessment
    • Team building activity and debrief
    June 20
    • Guest speaker: Sticky Wall
    • Facilitation and discussion or applications
    • Facilitation models and demonstrations
    • Video conflict in teams
    • Facilitating conflict and disagreement
    June 27
    • Update and discussion on assignment progress
    • Choosing appropriate team interventions
    • Practice facilitation (Assignment 1)
    July 11
    • Team norms: Unwritten and written
    • Activity on team norms
    • Guest speaker: Action learning in teams
    • Update on assignments, individual research, consultation with instructor
    July 25
    • Small-group sharing of literature reviews (Assignment 3)
    • Large-group informal sharing and discussion of Assignment 2
    • Wrap-up; turn in all assignments and lessons learned
    Texts
    Required
    • Hughes, Marcia, & Terrell, James Bradford. (2007). The Emotionally Intelligent Team. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    • Team Emotional and Social Intelligence Survey (TESI). Published by Collaborative Growth. Price TBD after first class.
    References and Suggested Readings

    There are myriad, pertinent texts and journal articles available. Some select sources follow.

    Group Facilitation Listserve: Send an email message to Listserv@albany.edu. In the body of the message, type “subscribe grp-facl your name.” Do not include any other text or signature in your message.
    Bradford, L. P. (1978). Group development. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer.
    Deeprose, D. (1995). The team coach. New York: AMACOM.
    Doyle, M., & Straus, D. (1993). How to make meetings work. New York: Berkley.
    Francis, D., & Young, D. (1992). Improving work groups. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer.
    Friend, J., & Hickling, A. (1988). Planning under pressure. New York: Pergamon Press.
    Goodman, P., & Wright, G. (1991). Decision analysis for management judgment. New York: John Wiley.
    Goodman, P. S., & Associates. (1986). Designing effective work groups. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Guzzo, R. A., Salsa, E., & Associates. (1995). Team effectiveness and decision making in organizations. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
    Hughes, M., Thompson, H. L., & Terrell, J. B. (Eds.). (2009). Handbook for developing emotional and social intelligence. San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
    Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision making. New York: The Free Press.
    Katzenbach, J., & Smith, D. (1999). The wisdom of teams. New York: Harper.
    Kayser, T. A. (1990). Mining group gold. El Segundo, CA: Serif Publishing.
    Krueger, R. A. (1988). Focus groups. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
    Mosvick, R. K., & Nelson, R. B. (1987). We've got to start meeting like this. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
    Nutt, P. C. (2002). Why decisions fail. San Francisco: Berrett-Loehler.
    Reddy, W. B. (1994). Intervention skills: Process consultation for small groups and teams. San Diego, CA: Pfeiffer.
    Russo, J. E., & Schoemaker, P. J. (1989). Decision traps. New York: Fireside.
    Salas, E., Bowers, C., & Edens, E. (Eds.). (2001). Improving teamwork in organizations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    Schwarz, R. M. (2002). The skilled facilitator—Practical wisdom for developing effective groups (
    2nd ed.
    ). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
    Yeatts, D. E., & Hyten, C. (1998). High-Performance self-managed work teams. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    University Honor Pledge

    As a member of the University community, I agree to uphold the principles of honor set forth by this community, to defend these principles against abuse or misuse, and to abide by the regulations of the university.

    Disability Accommodation Statement

    Special needs and accommodations: Please address with the instructor any special problems or needs at the beginning of the semester. Those seeking accommodations based on disabilities should obtain a Faculty Contact Sheet from the Disability Support Services (DSS) office located on the Main Campus.

    Access to Student Work

    Copies of your work in this course, including copies of any submitted papers and your portfolios, may be kept on file for institutional research, assessment, and accreditation purposes. All work used for these purposes will be submitted anonymously.

    Appendix E: Suggested Readings and/or Web Site URLs

    For Faculty
    Selected Web Site Resources
    Conferences and Organizations
    Teaching Blogs
    For Deans, Chairs, and Coordinators of Adjunct Faculty Affairs
    Books
    Baron-Nixon, L. (2007). Connecting non full-time faculty to institutional mission: A guidebook for college/university administrators and faculty developers. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
    Gillespie, K. H., Hilsen, L. R., & Wadsworth, E. C. (2002). A guide to faculty development: Practical advice, examples, and resources. Bolton, MA: Anker.
    Seldin, P., & Associates. (1995). Improving college teaching. Bolton, MA: Anker.
    Sorcinelli, M. D., Austin, A. E., Eddy, P. L., & Beach, A. L. (2006). Creating the future of faculty development: Learning from the past, understanding the present. Bolton, MA: Bolton.
    Web Sites

    About the Editors

    Lorri E. Cooper is associate professor and director of the MS in Management program at Marymount University in Arlington, VA. She teaches courses in leadership, managing innovation, and the management capstone and chairs the university's Graduate Studies Committee. Her research and writing focus on leadership development, particularly for practicing managers, management education, and how principles of design can effectively enhance and influence leadership practices. She earned a masters degree at Vanderbilt University and her doctorate degree at the University of Virginia, where she minored in leadership studies and wrote her dissertation on leadership development for private college presidents and governing boards. During her time at the University of Virginia, she served as a research associate and then as an administrative director at the Darden Graduate School of Business Administration. Prior to her academic career, she worked in management consulting with banking and real estate industries in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area.

    Bryan A. Booth is professor and executive director of the Doctor of Management program at University of Maryland University College (UMUC) in Adelphi, MD. In that role he provides leadership and manages the 48-credit, part-time, cohort-based, doctorate program for over 350 students. He earned his PhD in organizational behavior, with minors in anthropology and human resources, from the Industrial and Labor Relations School at Cornell University. In addition, he earned a certificate in Management and Leadership in Education from Harvard's Graduate School of Education. His research and application interests include team development, especially among faculty; emergent leadership; and multimethod collaboration in the classroom. He has training experience in developing the multicultural classroom and cross-cultural communication. Prior to joining UMUC, he taught Organizational Behavior, Labor Relations, and International Business at Shippensburg University, where he also directed the International Management major.

    About the Contributors

    Terry D. Anderson is professor and Canada Research Chair in Distance Education at Athabasca University, Canada's Open University, where he teaches educational technology courses in the Master's and Doctorate of Distance Education programs. He is active in provincial, national, and international distance education associations, and his widely published research has focused on interaction and its use and impact in distance education. Anderson is the director of CIDER, the Canadian institute for Distance Education Research (http://cider.athabascau.ca), and the editor of the International Review of Research on Distance and Open Learning (http://www.irrodl.org). His most recent edited book, The Theory and Practice of Online Learning (2nd ed.), was the winner of the 2009 Charles E. Wedemeyer Award for the outstanding book of 2008, awarded by the Distance Learning Community of Practice of the University Continuing Education Association. His blog, the “Virtual Canuck,” is accessible at http://terrya.edublogs.org.

    Jodi R. Cressman is founding director, Center of Teaching and Learning Excellence at Dominican University in River Forest, IL. In that role, she supports both full-time and adjunct faculty in evaluating and improving their teaching and engaging in the scholarship of teaching and learning. She also serves as associate professor of English, with a primary scholarly interest in autobiography. Before coming to Dominican, Jodi taught English and directed the Office for Teaching, Learning and Assessment at DePaul University. Jodi has published and presented on higher education topics such as assessing understanding and critical thinking, faculty theories of learning, and increasing student engagement. She has also served as an assessment mentor for the Higher Learning Commission. She earned her MA and PhD from Emory University.

    Vera L. B. Dolan holds a master's degree in distance education from Athabasca University, where her thesis research focused on the factors that drive motivation and loyalty in online faculty, work that was recognized by a graduate award from the Canadian Network for Innovation in Education (CNIE). She is continuing these investigations at the doctoral level, focusing on faculty training and the delivery and improvement of online education. Following completion of an undergraduate degree in communications at PUC de São Paulo, Dolan began her professional career in media communications and human resources at Citibank/MasterCard Brazil. Upon moving to Canada, she completed the postgraduate program in Human Resources Management at Seneca College and worked as a cross-cultural trainer with executives from a wide range of organizations, including Exxon/Imperial Oil, McKinsey, Warner-Lambert, and the Government of Canada.

    Susanne Bruno Ninassi is assistant professor and program director for Business Law, Paralegal Studies, and Legal Administration programs at Marymount University in Arlington, VA. Serving in this capacity, she is responsible for leading the programs, advising both undergraduate and graduate students, managing program faculty, and teaching several courses, including the following: Introduction for the Legal System, Civil Litigation, Business Law I and II, and Paralegal Internship. In addition to serving on academic panels and boards, she is a member of the university's Academic Integrity Committee. She has addressed professional conferences and published a number of papers concerning her academic interests in ethics in health care and paralegal education and development. Before coming to Marymount, she earned her JD at the University of Baltimore School of Law and practiced law in the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area, specializing in civil litigation. She is licensed to practice law in Maryland and the District of Columbia.

    Cynthia H. Roman is assistant professor of management and director of Human Resource Management programs at Marymount University in Arlington, VA. She also has over 20 years of experience in management consulting, leadership coaching, training, and organization development, and she is managing partner with Strategic Performance Group, a management consulting firm in the Washington, D.C., area. She has coauthored two books on leadership coaching and is currently writing a book on teaching and learning in higher education for the American Society of Training and Development. Before coming to Marymount, Dr. Roman taught at several other universities, including the University of Maryland and the University of North Carolina. She has taught both graduate and undergraduate students, in the classroom and online. Dr. Roman received her doctoral degree from Virginia Tech and wrote her dissertation on effective instruction in graduate education. Her academic interests are in leadership coaching, learning theory, and instructional methods.

    Theodore E. Stone is director of Academic Technology, Office of Information Technology, at University of Maryland University College (UMUC) in Adelphi, MD. In that role, he monitors and evaluates emerging technologies for review and potential inclusion into the University's e-learning suite. As a faculty member at UMUC, Dr. Stone is a professor in the Master of Education program, where he specializes in courses on educational technology and has led the capstone course for the MEd program for several years. Dr. Stone has taught Instructional Design and Educational Technology in the University System of Maryland since 1992. Before coming to UMUC, Dr. Stone was director of Learning Technologies at the University of Maryland School of Nursing, Baltimore. His PhD was earned at the University of Maryland at College Park in the field of Curriculum and Instruction. His academic interests are in faculty development, teaching with technology, consumer informatics, and lifelong learning.


    • Loading...
Back to Top

Copy and paste the following HTML into your website