Career Stages of Community College Faculty: A Qualitative Analysis of their Career Paths, Roles, and Development.

Twenty-two faculty at a Midwestern community college were interviewed to elicit their perceptions of their career paths, their early-stage career roles, and the role played by faculty development in their early careers. Based on the interview data, the majority did not foresee their career path and chose the community college because of its emphasis on teaching. Participants indicated that their career roles changed over time from an emphasis totally on teaching to one that included supplemental activities and that research was encouraged in their work. Many perceived faculty development activities as having a significant impact on their careers. The authors make recommendations for faculty recruitment, retention, and development.

Despite the growth of community colleges in our society and the claim that the strength of these colleges is in their faculty, very little research has been done in recent years to provide insight into this group of academic professionals. Over time, studies have provided certain demographic characteristics of community college faculty, often on a national level, and reflected the change in background from a group of high school teachers fleeing the public school system (Gleazer, 1968; Johnson, 1958) to a group of faculty without a clearly specified professional role (Alfred & Linder, 1992; Cohen & Brawer, 1972, 1996). Researchers have cyclically looked at faculty job satisfaction, preparation, staff development, issues of teaching and learning, and career stages (Barnsley, 1992; Carter & Ottinger, 1992: Cohen, 1972, 1973; Frankel, 1973; Keim, 1989; O'Banion, 1972). Yet these findings are often drawn from the extremes of national survey data or discipline-specific studies (Debard, 1995; Zappia, 1995). Additionally, data on community college faculty are often derived from subsets of larger studies of postsecondary faculty or from using four-year college models to study two-year college faculty (Blackburn & Lawrence, 1995; Furniss, 1981). Few studies have focused on developing two-year college faculty models or on beliefs about and constructions of the community college faculty role. With the prediction of faculty shortages looming on the horizon (Bowen & Schuster, 1986; California Educational Policies Committee, 1991), it seems prudent that decision makers have a different understanding of their current (and prospective) labor force that is afforded through more in-depth inquiry into the lives of community college faculty.

To that end, the study described in this report was conducted to examine community college faculty in the early stages of their careers. This study represented an attempt to understand more deeply factors leading faculty to employment in a community college, conceptualizations of the faculty members' roles during early career years, and the potential impact of faculty development during this same period. A qualitative study of faculty at Midwest Community College (a pseudonym) was designed. Midwest Community College (MCC) was selected because its recruitment has remained stable during the last decade. It is a large suburban institution offering curricula across the comprehensive community college spectrum that had hired sufficient numbers of new faculty throughout that spectrum from which a sufficient sample could be drawn. Even if unlike more rural settings, the entry experiences of MCC faculty might be in common with faculty at other urban and suburban colleges where postsecondary and private sector employment options are fairly broad, regardless of advanced or specialized training.

Twenty-two early career community college faculty at MCC were purposively selected to meet the following criteria: (a) they were in their first six years of full-time teaching at a community college; (b) they represented diversity between liberal arts and technical-vocational programs; and (c) the sample included both gender and cultural diversity. Faculty were selected to capture these varied curricular orientations. Individual face-to-face interviews were audio recorded, using semi-structured protocols; interviews lasted, on average, 90 minutes. The following research questions guided the study:

* What career path did the recently hired full-time faculty follow?

* How did they conceptualize their roles during the early stages of their career?

* What was the stage delineation, if any, for faculty during their first six years of full-time employment at MCC?

* What role did faculty development serve during their early career?

Analysis of interview tapes, verbatim transcripts, and field notes provided the means for emergent themes to surface from which to draw preliminary conclusions. The tenets of Merriam (1988), Lincoln and Guba (1985), and Patton (1980) were used to guide analysis of data and the development of emergent themes.

Summary of Results

In-depth analyses of the data collected were divided into three areas: faculty career paths to the community college; roles assumed by community college faculty during early career stages; and, the impact of faculty development during early career stages.

Career Paths to the Community College

The vast majority of the faculty in this study did not foresee an academic career as they entered higher education. For some, the decision to move into teaching came because a job became available. Others initially interested in teaching were discouraged from pursuing this choice; they prepared for careers in other areas and later found their way back to teaching. Some never considered teaching as an option but had an opportunity at some point in their career to do some instruction. Finding it enjoyable, they made the decision to switch careers and enter the teaching profession. A few had what Furniss (1981) considered a traditional background--they entered college pursuing a career in education. Even so, it was either a career as a university professor or as a public school teacher, not as a community college faculty member. Only one participant viewed community college teaching as a viable career alternative early on, but only as a break from graduate school; he did not plan this path as he began his education. This same person was the only participant in the study ever encouraged by another member of the academy to teach at a community college.

Yet for faculty who found their way to Midwest Community College, there were factors that attracted them to this career and things that caused them to stay. The first of these was the ability to avoid the tenure process in four-year institutions. Tenure was viewed as a serious deterrent to a faculty career as well as an unnecessary evil that came with teaching at a four-year institution. As one participant noted, "I spoke with too many frustrated academics who were grinding out another pointless article very cynically for the sake of the tenure track. I said, `No, I don't think so.'"

The tenure process itself deterred faculty from four-year institutions, but the prospect of research did not. As one liberal arts instructor clarified,

   The whole publish or perish sort of paradigm that operates at
   universities.... It's not that publishing necessarily bothers me.... I
   wanted to teach. I knew I would teach at a university, but I wouldn't teach
   as much and I wouldn't focus as much on teaching because I would be worried
   about getting published.

A second attraction of the community college was its focus on teaching, which matched participants' desires to be teachers. The following statement captures the perception of the value of teaching at community colleges:

   [Not working at a research university] may be more important then because
   you're dealing with a group of people who don't value teaching the way
   community college teachers do. It's part of the stated mission [at a
   community college]. It's ingrained in everything you do in the sense that
   theory is fine but give me practical application first. "How can I use it
   in my classroom?"

For some, a third reason for taking employment at a community college was pragmatic. Community colleges hired faculty without doctoral degrees, and a number of the faculty in this study did not have terminal degrees at the time they were seeking instructional positions.

   I taught at the university level as a graduate assistant and as an
   adjunct.... I got the great big survey sections.... I loved the teaching,
   and I loved the freshman-sophomore level. I was good at it ... so they just
   kept letting me do it.... I quit because I finally got to the point where I
   needed to take my doctoral exams and do a doctoral thesis.... [University
   colleagues] told me that they would never hire me there although they had
   hired me all those years and I think they liked my teaching. I'd have to go
   someplace else once I got this degree.... I could see the end of the
   line.... [Community colleges] allowed me to teach my subject with a
   master's degree.

Another pragmatic attraction expressed by a number of faculty in this study was the potential for greater salaries at a community college because of recognition of years of experience as well as academic degrees. Although not all faculty seemed comfortable stating that teaching positions were chosen because of salary, respondents made it clear in other cases that they made choices between professional alternatives because of salary, benefits, and perceived employment security that came with working in the community college environment.

Finally, several of the faculty attended community colleges at some point in their postsecondary career. Positive memories of their educational experiences caused them to consider teaching at this type of institution. One participant noted the role previous academic experience as a student had on her decision to seek an instructor's position in a community college setting:

   During the time I was working on my undergraduate degree, I dropped out of
   college for a couple of years. When I went back, I went to a community
   college to kind of get myself back on track. It was actually there that I
   had a real good math teacher for the first time who explained math.... I
   wound up in this one person's class one time taking an algebra class, and
   for the first time in my life, it all made sense.... My original intent in
   going back to graduate school was to teach at a community college. I always
   thought it was a wonderful thing.

In sum, community college faculty in this study did not follow a predetermined path to their present careers. The majority of the group interviewed chose teaching following or in conjunction with another career. For those who intentionally chose teaching as a career, the community college was not the initial preferred employment site. At no time in their educational preparation were the majority ever advised about or even made aware of the community college as a teaching venue. An institution without tenure pressures, the opportunity to focus on teaching, the lack of required doctorate in the discipline, the potential for part-time positions, prior experience at a community college as a student, and a salary scale based on education and experience were factors influencing the choice of community college instruction for the faculty at Midwest Community College.

Faculty Roles During Early Career Years

Participants were asked to conceptualize their faculty role from three different perspectives: their current role, how the role may have changed during their tenure at the community college, and any projections of change in role for the future.

Current Role. Early literature suggesting that community college faculty focus on teaching was supported in the definitions of initial career roles of the faculty in this study. Through their descriptions, teaching was articulated to be much more than disseminating information in the discipline. It encompassed facilitating the learning processes of students, helping them to appreciate learning, exciting them with the learning process, providing avenues for students to acquire the subject matter, and heading students into a career or further education as well-prepared as possible. Faculty used descriptors such as mentor, role model, coach, advocate, student facilitator, and guide as expressions of their role. Noted one vocational instructor,

   My primary responsibility is giving my students the best or highest quality
   education and knowledge that I can for them to go out in their careers and
   succeed.... I'm constantly looking for research, trying to bring them to
   the most current level of what's going on.

This sentiment was echoed by faculty in the liberal arts, as well.

Although secondary to teaching, other aspects of the faculty role included service both to the community and to the college. These roles seemed to increase as faculty moved into the second year of employment and beyond, but never to the degree that service superceded the goal of teaching. Not surprisingly, community service was especially important to those in technical-vocational areas and often was viewed as a departmental goal. One faculty member saw the priority this way:

   I do think we play a big part in the community. We are a community
   college.... We belong to professional societies. We've got local, state and
   national organizations.... It definitely isn't just come out here and teach
   and go home. You're a part of this community.... I think we owe [service
   and expertise] to the community as a return for what they've given us.

The tie to the community was seemingly more obvious and important to the teaching roles of faculty in technical-vocational areas, yet it was also part of the orientation of liberal arts faculty. Whether as ambassadors representing the college and its purposes in daily conversations with neighbors and community members, providing expertise through workshops and programs in the public schools or other state agencies, or just becoming more familiar with the issues of the community to better understand the needs and agendas of students in the classroom, liberal arts faculty articulated a strong sense of responsibility to be present in the community and to "give back."

Service to the college through committee work was perceived not only as necessary for the health of the college but also as beneficial to the faculty members. For those who began their careers as adjunct professors, service to the college started right away as part of an effort to become involved, to be seen as a contributor, and to ease transition to full-time employment. As is true for faculty at other kinds of institutions, involvement in institutional committee assignments was not always evenly distributed across faculty (adjunct or full-time) and, for some, became a time commitment seen to draw away from teaching responsibilities. Concern was not expressed about whether institutional service was an appropriate expectation of faculty, but some participants expressed a need for individual faculty to find better balance over time.

Faculty were divided as to whether research could be characterized as part of their faculty role. Research on the whole was valued, though there were some faculty who felt it was an "extra" rather than an integral part of their role. Others argued that it was indeed a part of the role and tied directly to their success as teachers. One might presume that those in favor of research were in liberal arts whereas those opposed were technical-vocational faculty, but no clear factors were revealed as determining research orientation. All faculty in the study agreed that research in the university model (meaning research to gain tenure and rank) was not an appropriate schema for research at a community college, and many argued that the option to do research made it a far more appealing proposition. One faculty member whose early career included scientific research, which he called "pure research," discussed his view of inquiry in the community college context as follows:

   I like to do research. I would like to continue doing research, but
   research is not my primary goal. Otherwise, I wouldn't be here. I still
   publish. I'm preparing slides for my previous work. If I would like to do
   research, it is possible.... In the summer, I can always go and do
   research.... It is kind of a nice and relaxed atmosphere which gives you
   the choice.

A technical-vocational faculty member expressed a similar opinion:

   Well, there's one thing in particular that I kind of said to myself,
   "You're going to find a way to do this and be involved in it," and that's
   research, which I never thought I'd say because it gagged me when I was
   taking classes. I do see a need for it, and I don't think it has to occur
   just at the university level.... I would certainly like to be involved
   because I think it also helps our students to see that we're involved in
   that.

The emphasis on connecting research to students was also evident in the types of research suggested by several faculty members. Assessment, work on student success indicators, and inquiry to improve pedagogy were just a few kinds of research that suggest faculty undertake such activity for multiple purposes at a community college. Especially with what is often considered a very high teaching load in comparison with other institutional settings, multiple definitions of research and inquiry become important considerations when looking at the work of community college faculty.

Contrasting Definitions of Role Across Time. When asked to describe changes in their role from point of entry into the community college to later in their tenure there, the only apparent differentiation made by participants came between years one and two. Faculty indicated that during the first year of employment at Midwest Community College, their focus was primarily on teaching based on both their own initiative and need, and on the institution's reinforcement and need. For the majority of participants, the first year was their first full-time teaching experience. At a personal level, they were very concerned with effective classroom performance. Thus, they spent a great deal of time on things such as classroom preparation, assignment preparation, assignment feedback, test construction, and test feedback. Furthermore, during the institutional orientation, in meetings with direct supervisors, and in discussions with other colleagues, faculty noted teaching was always stressed as most important.

As they began their second year, faculty saw an increase in their supplemental faculty roles, particularly service to the college community, and a change in their role as teacher--the latter tied to having had a year's experience in the classroom. In year two, faculty perceived an opportunity to "perfect" and relax with the role of instructor. As one faculty member noted,

   That [first year] they made it quite clear that we were to focus on
   teaching. They wanted you to make sure that you put that as your top
   priority.... I still feel that, but I'm also feeling now there's a sense
   of, "Okay, well join some committees," or "Let's get you involved in
   something else." When you evaluate yourself, the form says, "What else have
   you been doing?" ... On the one hand, it seems like there's a real verbal
   "teaching, teaching, teaching" kind of thing going on, but then when it
   comes down to your evaluation process, it's teaching; but here are all
   these other things that are being looked at as well that can be a part of
   it.... They're looking at professional development more than I realized.
   Maybe even more than the university did. They really want you to achieve.
   They want you to be the best you can be. They want you to get involved in
   various kinds of activities.

Beyond this demarcation at year two, there did not appear to be any further themes that emerged in clarifying or changing the faculty role definition. Actual activity sometimes changed from year to year (for example, increased committee work, pursuit of research), but the overall role conceptualization did not. This is in contrast with career stage research conducted at four-year institutions where mid-probationary review and tenure decisions for continuous employment are significant milestones. At Midwest Community College, faculty did not receive continuing contracts until after their third year, even though their performance was reviewed annually. It was interesting to note that faculty did not view the probationary years as a distinct stage in the same way that faculty at four-year institutions view their own probationary periods (Baldwin, 1990; Boice, 1992). Rather, these faculty believed that if they made it past the first-year reviews and received positive feedback from supervisors and students, they were confident that there should be no cause for problems beyond that year.

The majority of the faculty seemed content with their roles and role definitions, did not perceive significant changes to their roles in the future, and planned to continue teaching at the community college level. Even having said this, two concerns surfaced for many of the faculty at Midwest Community College: burnout and, to a lesser extent, the ability to continue to serve the changing student population. Interestingly, the continuity of the role and role definition was seen as a strong factor in potential burnout. One member's reflection rang true for many:

   My biggest fear is that I'm going to burnout. But I could get burned-out at
   a university just as easily. I don't know. I wasn't [at the university]
   long enough to get to the stage where I really felt burned out. If I had to
   teach five sections of the same course for the rest of my life, I'm not
   sure that I could do it.... The job itself and the hours are wonderful. The
   school is great. Everything is great. It's just actually burning out in the
   classroom [that is my concern].

The open door nature of community colleges increases the likelihood of a diverse population, and the increasing challenge brought to bear on the classroom by learners with disparate needs was not lost on this group of faculty as they considered their own future as instructors and learning facilitators. One faculty member shared her thoughts:

   I know Generation X is hard to work with. It's already different.... I see
   the generation gap in [classes of 18-year-olds and those of different age
   groups].... You have all this information, and you wonder how to apply it.
   People are changing all the time so we're working with a different
   generation gap. I don't know what the next one's going to be. I'm sure
   they'll have a name for it.

In sum, community college faculty in this study conceptualized their role primarily as teacher. Teaching involved going beyond the subject matter to facilitating learning itself and preparing students for their careers. Supplemental components of service to the community, service to the institution, and research were part of most faculty member's role definitions.

Changes in these conceptualizations appeared to be greatest between the first and second years, where change occurred both in individual approaches to teaching and in the emergence of supplemental roles. The majority of the faculty did not perceive great variations in their role as they looked towards the future. Classroom burnout and the challenge of an increasingly diverse student population were raised as potential issues to be faced in the future. These concerns did not appear to be strong enough of deterrents to cause faculty to question their continuing role as community college educators.

Faculty Development During Early Career Years

Faculty development had a significant impact in the early career development of faculty at Midwest Community College. Those entering the teaching profession with no prior instructional experience had immediate needs for development of teaching skills. Most of the faculty felt that some kind of educational preparation would have been beneficial prior to assuming an instructional position, particularly given the nature of the student population. One faculty member with teaching experience prior to assuming his community college position noted the distinction in requisite preparation between demands of his four-year and two-year teaching experiences this way:

   I think a teacher in a community college has to have an educational
   background. What I mean by educational background is instructional.... When
   you walk into a graduate school classroom or like when I was teaching at
   four-year colleges, I was teaching in the senior year.... There you cover
   material. It's the student's responsibility to get it. Here you have to
   have the expertise to make sure that the student does not leave the
   classroom until they get it.... You have to understand [the students']
   social background, their psychological background and all that, and deal
   with it differently than just meeting with a whole bunch of people and
   assuming that they are all the same.

Community college faculty may look to staff development programs for instructional expertise and support, even when they are pursuing terminal degrees in their discipline--a factor not always apparent when thinking about ways of preparing for careers in teaching. One liberal arts instructor pursuing a doctorate in her discipline noted the discrepancy between the degree-institutional orientation of her doctoral committee and her own professional aspirations to be a teacher.

   When I realized I liked teaching so much, I went ahead and took a couple of
   educational psychology classes and had some difficulty in getting nay
   [doctoral] committee to let me do this.... I knew then that's what I wanted
   to do. So I did that despite the committee.

Faculty in their first year expressed the value of institutional faculty development programs that assisted them with day-to-day issues in the classroom. Many faculty, particularly those in technical-vocational areas, argued that work in the career field prior to entering teaching was also essential as noted by this reflection, "If you haven't been out there and experienced it, how can you come in here and teach your students what it's like?" These same faculty valued opportunities to improve their teaching either through individual means or institutional programs as well.

Many faculty expressed concern with the lack of knowledge they had about community colleges as academic institutions and employment venues prior to beginning their current jobs. For these faculty, orientation was viewed as an important opportunity to learn the philosophy of the institution as well as the key players and the institutional priorities. A number of faculty felt orientation should be expanded to include practical classroom teaching advice specific to the community college and its student population.

As a whole, participants saw faculty development programs as an important component of the ability to be effective teachers. Development activities were believed to be both a personal responsibility of continued professional improvement and an institutional responsibility in supporting staff. Participation in professional organizations, reading in professional journals, attending conferences focused on either disciplinary or instructional issues, presenting papers at conferences, and assuming leadership positions within organizations were all expressed as valuable individual approaches to professional development. Many in the technical-vocational fields also spoke of working part-time in their areas during summers or school breaks as an important vehicle for remaining current in the field and providing relevant content to students. Others referred to continuing educational programs, including advanced degree work, both for renewed certification and for professional development.

The most frequently mentioned institutional professional activity was faculty orientation, most likely because it was the activity all participants shared in common. As one person noted, "I thought it was good because it kind of gave you an overall view of how everything is set up around here. I had no idea about that when I was teaching adjunct." Other activities in which faculty participated included master teacher workshops, brown bag sessions on teaching and learning, video conferences on learning, exchanges with faculty at other colleges and in other countries, on-campus conferences, and colloquia with colleagues within and across disciplines. Many faculty shared comments similar to these about the importance of orientation activities:

   One of the things that's nice is that we have different centers here which
   can teach you a lot more information that probably you've ever had before
   like the Educational Technology Center, the Center for Teaching and
   Learning, and even the Writing Center.... I also have the availability of
   funds from the college for travelling to conferences ... the chance to
   learn here and to develop yourselves.... I've never seen anything else like
   it to be honest with you. You have to be willing to do it.... The only
   problem is time to do it all.

There were no discernible differences in the views of liberal arts faculty and technical-vocational faculty regarding professional development. Neither did differences exist in the opinions by gender or ethnicity. Faculty felt that development opportunities were provided for new classroom techniques, better understanding of the student population, and support from colleagues in similar situations. They also were quick to discuss areas of future faculty development needs including continual opportunities to update technological skills, expansion of workshops on diversity, pedagogical implications of the changing student population, and additional opportunities for learning more about colleagues.

Discussion

This study of early career faculty at Midwest Community College, while an in-depth look at only one institution, presented several findings for discussion that can be relevant to other community colleges and to those interested in fostering the academic labor force of the next century. This discussion focuses on the impact of study findings for faculty recruitment, retention, and development, and the professional role of faculty.

Faculty Recruitment

Bowen and Schuster (1986) argued that fewer and fewer students are opting for academic careers. More than 10 years later, the reality of this concern is evident in analyzing the career paths of the 22 community college faculty hired in the past six years at MCC. The majority of these faculty initially did not select an academic career. If the California Educational Policies Committee Report (1991) forecasting as much as a 50% retirement rate in the next 19 years among community college faculty is correct, or other individual institutional predictions rising as high as 80%, administrators should be concerned not only by the small number of people who intended to become faculty but by the fact that only 1 person in the 22 studied initially saw community college instruction as a viable career. From these findings alone, it is clear that issues of faculty recruitment are paramount to the future viability of the workforce at community colleges. Traditionally asystematic processes have become the norm (Hawthorne, 1994), and they might permit the flexibility required to capture the variation in prospective faculty orientations reflected in this study. This will be possible, however, only with better understanding of the truly diverse backgrounds and professional careers from which the faculty pool is derived. That so many faculty came to the career and to the institution serendipitously does not bode well for the future unless more creative recruitment methods are implemented. In the same way that many colleges have moved to innovative student recruitment strategies, attention needs to be given to the venues in which instructional positions are posted, the kinds of faculty recruitment activities in which all members of the college community are actively involved, and the ways in which positions and the college itself are presented. Again, if the findings at MCC reflect circumstances at other community colleges, the recruitment process needs to be educative in helping persons think through careers as faculty, and it is also needs to orient them towards the community college environment itself.

It is also clear that an academic hierarchy continues to exist in which certain kinds of educational experiences are valued and promoted more than others. That only one person in the study reported ever having been encouraged to consider community colleges as a viable employment option, and that many reported the sector not being promoted as an academic environment for them as students, should be of concern. Statistics are clear that the number of students attending community colleges for some duration of their academic careers is growing (Doughtery, 1994). But it is also true that graduate programs do little to encourage the viability of the sector for employment (Atwell, 1996), especially among prospective faculty, and that much literature in higher education tends to portray community colleges as poor relatives of research universities, often being omitted or relegated to a single chapter in texts. Appropriately trained, committed professionals are critically important in a postsecondary sector whose mission is, in part, to support those students who have been neglected and marginalized by the traditional collegiate system. These students might be better served in the end if the best and the brightest of the future professoriate are intentionally channeled into community colleges. Should these students' academic prospects hang on the hope that the best faculty somehow find their way into this sector?

Faculty Retention and Development

Boice (1992) and Baldwin (1990) claimed that retention of faculty requires an understanding of how and why people come to the faculty role, socialization issues, and developmental challenges faced by new faculty. The authors further suggest that if incentives or other institutional interventions become a necessity, it is even more critical to understand faculty backgrounds and what keeps faculty teaching at an institution, in this case, at community colleges. The variation of background and orientation towards teaching evident at Midwest Community College suggests that a "one-size-fits-all" approach to retention will not be successful. Additionally, faculty retention could potentially become an issue if the following scenarios develop:

1. Faculty shortages at all institutions make the labor market a buyer's market. Four-year institutions, particularly public and less selective liberal arts colleges, may find themselves making concessions to attract prospective faculty, and one of which could well be tenure (for example, changing requirements for, doing away with, or providing alternatives to tenure). Although the faculty in this study indicated a desire or plan to stay in the sector, the same group identified the tenure process at four-year institutions as one of the primary factors influencing their decision to teach at a community college. Community college administrators need to continue to provide faculty with the opportunity to define their roles in a positive light so the lure of other institutions will not further decrease the community college faculty pool. This would require, among other strategies, being proactive regarding the concerns of classroom burnout and ability to address the learning needs of a changing student population. Creative staffing patterns, sabbatical leaves, opportunities for renewal and professional development initiatives are critical institutional vehicles for better supporting quality faculty.

2. Private industry strengthens its incentives to draw individuals out of higher education. Although a concern for certain disciplines across postsecondary education, the community college is in a unique position to be affected by this scenario, especially within its technical-vocational areas. The threat could happen at two levels directly affecting faculty. The first is the initial lure of high salaries in the private sector for graduating seniors, master's recipients, and doctoral candidates. This is not a new threat to higher education, yet several of the faculty in this study from both technical-vocational and liberal arts programs discussed salary pressures as they described initial career choices. Midwest Community College traditionally maintains competitive salaries with its academic competition, which may or may not be true for many smaller, rural colleges; yet the private sector in the communities that surround Midwest continues to burgeon, and salaries and advancement opportunities have done likewise, presenting a different form of competition. That community college faculty may be more aware of the potential opportunities and salary disparities because of their community involvement is a challenging artifact of institutional mission that may not be as common for colleges whose faculty tend to be internally focused. Better support for teaching as a profession and the community college as a potential employment sector need to be present early in one's academic experience for prospective graduates to consider such a career choice.

For those who select community college instruction as their career, it is seemingly critical that appropriate institutional instructional support be made available especially during the first year. This finding again corresponds with Boice's (1992) and others' research on new faculty, but the implication of the finding is greater for community college instructors who define their role as teacher. Without appropriately targeted and tailored instructional support, new community college faculty may be pulled away from the professoriate by the career opportunities fostered in the private sector. Therefore, faculty development and support activities are vehicles for retention as well as professional growth.

McGrath and Spear (1988) described the need for "activities that are designed self-consciously to create and sustain academic and intellectual practices among faculty as a group" (p. 53). They argue such practices, if offered routinely, alter and strengthen the academic culture of the college. McGrath and Spear and the findings from the current study suggest that sessions on teaching strategies, classroom management, classroom research, delivery methods, testing methods, and syllabus construction, and initiatives such as mentoring programs are just a few of those that could be offered in support of persons new to the teaching profession. The current study seems to support the need for professional development programs as retention strategies as well, in that faculty preparation concerns continue over time, including addressing the needs of changing student populations and issues of burnout. Overall, such offerings may be key to fostering a quality institutional labor force. Certainly at Midwest, early career faculty had strong motivation to engage in these activities and saw the importance of faculty development programs in their overall professional growth.

In times of fiscal restraint, therefore, it is important that community college administrators not view faculty development as a luxury or something for which funds need not be allocated. Removal of institutional programs likely would not eliminate individual faculty development, but it sends a message to faculty about the importance of their professional development. Furthermore, as in the case of the Midwest Community College faculty who feared burnout, faculty development programs provide important opportunities for enrichment and renewal in the faculty member's life--perhaps allowing for sustained growth and development rather than more rapid turnover. For instance, one of those interviewed who was concerned with burnout had the opportunity to exchange with a faculty member at a university for one semester. It reduced her sense of burnout, and she returned revitalized with new ideas for her department. It is essential to maintain existing levels of opportunity and to consider new, creative options for faculty development as well.

Professional Role of Faculty

Cohen and Brawer attempted to define a professional role for community college faculty in 1972; in 1996, they claimed that role remains undefined. The current study found that faculty wanted a clear professional role definition especially as related to their colleagues. Nearly every one interviewed asked at some point, "Did anyone else say this?" And, similar to earlier writings (Alfred & Linder, 1992; Palmer, 1992; Palmer, 1994), faculty wanted a stronger sense of professional community within the college. Social functions might certainly add a sense of community, but the faculty at Midwest were equally desirous of a greater sense of professional knowledge about their colleagues and a sense of pride in that group. Without always realizing it, the faculty were united in their sense of a common professional role definition--teacher. It was the lack of awareness that others saw themselves similarly, and with a high degree of pride in their work, that caused a certain uneasiness and isolation for those in the study. McGrath and Spear (1988) comment on the lack of respect for community college faculty and their efforts often depicted in the academy and in the literature. At least within their home institutions, conscientious efforts should be made to support and applaud the efforts of faculty as they become established in their careers. Continued activity within professional organizations and the opportunity to interject the community college voice into various academic conversations can only help to break down the "us versus them" mentality that sometimes pervades the relationship between members of the professoriate from different postsecondary sectors. A stronger sense of professional identity can emerge as a result, which is important to both faculty recruitment and retention efforts.

Conclusion

This study was conducted to examine community college faculty early career paths at one midwestern community college, conceptualizations of faculty members' roles during early' career years, and the potential impact of faculty development during this same time period. Community college faculty in this institution followed diverse career paths to their current teaching positions. They saw their primary role as teaching, but were also involved in their communities, their institutions, and in research. They saw a direct link between their ability to teach and faculty development and, as such, took advantage of faculty development opportunities. An argument could be made that these faculty indeed made up a profession, but they lacked awareness of what characterized this profession. The study' was a beginning, a first step, into the important exploration of a large population within the higher education academy. More work needs to be done to examine early career faculty at other community colleges. As important as demographic variables are faculty beliefs about their role and ways in which they construct their role. Better understanding of this cadre of the academic labor market should result in better retention and support efforts and a quality workforce for community colleges in the twenty-first century.

References

Alfred, R. L., & Linder, V. (1992). Empowering faculty through redefined work roles. In K. Kroll (Ed.), Maintaining faculty excellence (pp. 49-60). New Directions for Community Colleges, No. 79. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Baldwin, R. G. (1990). Faculty career stages and implications for professional development. In J. H. Schuster, D. W. Wheeler, & Associates (Eds.), Enhancing faculty careers: Strategies for development and renewal. (pp. 20-40). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Barnsley, J. R. (1992). An historical review of efforts to define the effective community college teacher: A chronological analysis of the literature from 1920 to 1989 (Effective teaching literature). Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Fayetteville: University of Arkansas.

Blackburn, R. T., & Lawrence, J. H. (1995). An assessment of faculty performance: Some correlates between administrator, colleague, student, and self ratings. Sociology of Education, 48(2), 242-256.

Boice, R. (1992). The new faculty member: Supporting and fostering professional development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Bowen, H. R., & Schuster, J. H. (1986). American professors: A national resource imperiled. New York: Oxford University Press.

California Educational Policies Committee. (1991). Hiring effective faculty: An introduction. Unpublished manuscript prepared for California Community Colleges. Sacramento: Author.

Carter, D. J., & Ottinger, C. A. (1992). Community college faculty: A profile. Research Briefs, 3(7).

Cohen, A. M. (1972). Confronting identity: The community college instructor. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Cohen, A. M. (1973). Work satisfaction among junior college faculty members. Los Angeles: ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 081 426)

Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (1972). The who, what, why of instructor evaluation. Topical Paper No. 33. Los Angeles: ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 060 839)

Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (1996). The American community college. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

DeBard, R. (1995). Preferred education and experience of community college English faculty: Twenty years later. Community College Review, 23(1), 33-50.

Doughtery, K. J. (1994). The contradictory college: The conflicting origins, impacts, and futures of the community college. Albany: SUNY Press.

Frankel, J. (1973). Junior college faculty job satisfaction. Los Angeles: ERIC Clearinghouse for Junior Colleges. (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED 081 425)

Furniss, W. T. (1981). Reshaping faculty careers. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

Gleazer, E. J. Jr. (1968). This is the community college. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Hawthorne, E. M. (1994). The preparation, screening, and selection of community college faculty members. In G. A. Baker III (Ed.), A handbook on the community college in America: Its history, mission, and management (pp. 99-409). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Johnson, B. L. (1958). Problems of preparing junior college teachers. Report of the state-wide conference on the preparation of junior college teachers. Sacramento: State Department of Education.

Keim, M. C. (1989). Two-year college faculty: A research update. Community College Review, 17(3), 34-43.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

McGrath, D., & Spear, M. B. (1988). A professoriate is in trouble and hardly anyone recognizes it. Change, 20(1), 26, 53.

Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

O'Banion, T. (1972). Teachers for tomorrow: Staff development in the community-junior college. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Palmer, J. C. (1994). Faculty practices and attitudes as teachers and scholars: A review of research. In G. A. Baker III (Ed.), A handbook on the community college in America: Its history, .mission, and management (pp. 423-435). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Palmer, J. (1992). Faculty professionalism reconsidered. In K. Kroll (Ed.), Maintaining faculty excellence (pp. 29-38). New Directions for Community Colleges, No. 79. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Patton, M. Q. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Zappia, C. A. (1995, November). History in the 1990s: The status of the profession in the community colleges. Paper presented at the National Conference of the Community College Humanities Association. Washington, DC.

Amy L. Fugate is a professor at Johnson County Community College in Overland Park, Kansas. [e-mail]

Marilyn J. Amey is an associate professor at Michigan State University in East Lansing, Michigan. [e-mail]