Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine current approaches to teaching used in academic development services and consider the diversity of their learners (academic faculty). Faculty engagement with teaching issues and innovations remains a concern for the higher education sector. The academic population contains large numbers of “hard to get at” people, struggling with workload and access issues.

An additional online resource for academic development, called In a nutshell, has been developed and trialed for three years in a variety of contexts. These resources incorporate voices into concise online presentations with links to further resources. Academic viewers can, in private, participate and make informed decisions about whether they need to learn more about a topic, or not.

A measurable improvement in faculty engagement with teaching issues and innovations has been detected that can be directly and indirectly attributed to this change in academic development approach. Usage data and user feedback supports the hypothesis that In a nutshells have had an impact on adult learners. Requests by faculty to collaborate on the production of new In a nutshells also indicate engagement. Positive changes in teaching and learning performance indicators are supportive.

The study provides evidence to support the use of concise, flexible and asynchronous online approaches as components of a structured academic development program that provides mandated and non‐mandated learning opportunities for university faculty. The addition of this approach can increase the reach of academic development to include those who can be traditionally hard to reach such as sessional faculty, workplace supervisors and time‐poor, full‐time academics. The concept has recently been extended to create concise learning support that engages and empowers new students to develop new skills.

A streaming server and software is required. Multiple versions of the material are created to ensure accessibility. The time commitment required to invest in initial production of high‐quality product is high; however, this is counter‐balanced by the re‐usability and outreach of the approach.

Partial alignment of learning design and user feedback to an inclusive adult motivation framework indicates that although In a nutshells do meet most requirements of the framework, complementary activities that build the competence of faculty are needed to be linked to In a nutshells to ensure that all targeted adults are motivated to learn.

We conjecture that there are five stages to academic entrepreneurship: motivation, governance, selection, competition, and performance. The process of academic entrepreneurship originates with the motivation of faculty, universities, industry, and government to commercialize knowledge that originates within the university setting. The model conceptualizes that the governance and competitiveness of the commercialized knowledge moderate the mode selection and ultimately the performance of academic entrepreneurship. The conceptual and empirical support for the model are derived from a theory-driven synthesis of articles related to academic entrepreneurship.

Faculty unionization is growing, and library faculty members are included in many collective bargaining units. Yet there is a dearth of information on how well collective bargaining contracts address the sometimes unique nature of library faculty work. This article explores contracts in a number of Ohio universities and from selective institutions around the country to see how well they accommodate the professional and work-related needs of librarians. Major contractual issues addressed include governance, academic freedom, workload, salary, and the retention, tenure, and promotion (RTP) of faculty, among others.

With a focus on Canada, but framed by similar and shared concerns emerging in the United States, this chapter examines the current status of what constitutes and defines academic freedom for academic librarians and the rights and the protections individual, professional academic librarians have with respect to the freedom of speech and expression of their views in speech and writing within and outside of their institutions. It reviews the historical background of academic freedom and librarianship in Canada, academic freedom language in collective agreements, rights legislation in Canada versus the United States as it pertains to academic librarianship, and rights statements supported by Canadian associations in the library field and associations representing members in postsecondary institutions. The implications of academic librarians using the new communication technologies and social media platforms, such as blogs and networking sites, with respect to academic freedom are examined, as well as, an overview of recent attacks on the academic freedom of academic librarians in the United States and Canada. Included in this analysis are the results of a survey of Canadian academic librarians, which examined attitudes about academic freedom, the external and internal factors which have an impact on academic freedom, and the professional use of new communication technologies and social media platforms.

Research models and practices change rapidly. While evidence of such changes includes cross-campus collaborations and multi-authored scholarship, faculty development opportunities also signal what is to come. In this case study, authors representing diverse disciplines examine what faculty development programs reveal about the future of academic research. The authors offer an analysis of faculty support programs across the country as a foundation, and then provide an examination of initiatives in place at their four-year regional comprehensive institution in the United States. The authors then report on the outcomes of these programs for research productivity, with a focus on opportunities that were available to all faculty across the university. Finally, the authors offer perspective on the future of academic research based on findings from examining these programs. The authors suggest that the future of research will focus on (1) collaborative design(s) of research-related support, (2) support structures and programs that encourage and facilitate cross-campus and interdisciplinary research collaborations and sharing, (3) incentive for integrating areas of research with teaching and service, and relatedly (4) programs that encourage faculty to span academic research with industry or community partnerships and collaborations, especially ones that can generate revenue or produce future research, development, or funding streams.

Faculty status for academic librarians is an issue that has been the subject of much debate in recent decades. The purpose of this paper is to examine the key points raised during this debate, in the hope of achieving a suitable resolution.

This paper begins with an overview of the issue of faculty status for academic librarians from an historical perspective and then continues with a review of literature from the past three decades. The pros and cons of granting faculty status are examined, as well as alternate models, followed by a proposed recommendation.

While there are a number of concerns regarding the value of faculty status for academic librarians, such as disagreement with the basic tenet that librarians are primarily teachers, the weight of the evidence seems to support the granting of faculty status to academic librarians. This status provides academic freedom, recognition of librarians in their role as educators, and financial benefits and job security and is supported by the Association of College and Research Libraries, the Association of American Colleges, and the American Association of University Professors.

While this paper is a review of selected relevant literature, only a small portion of the literature was of an empirical nature. There is a need for more studies which directly measure the impact of faculty status for academic librarians on the librarians themselves and the students, faculty, and institutions they serve.

The paper shows that with faculty status, academic librarians receive the same rights and privileges as other faculty and participate in college or university governance, thereby increasing the integration of the library with the institution.

In a previous study of authentic university academic caring (AUAC) at the University of the Virgin Islands (UVI), students perceived teaching faculty as the primary provider of academic caring and caregiving. This paper presents a research study on university faculty caring intelligence. University faculty caring intelligence is faculty's capacity to recognize the meaning and realities of caring within their performance, relationships and work environment.

A descriptive exploratory correlational research design was used to examine university faculty caring intelligence. A university academic caring framework and a faculty version of the Caring About Academic Care Inventory (CAACI) were employed. The university academic caring framework was used to guide the research. The faculty version of the CAACI assessed university faculty's discernments of AUAC within identified interfacing university academic caregiving points (institutional, instructional, academic management and academic counseling). The study sample consisted of 76 UVI faculty.

Factor score correlation completed in this work revealed strong relationships between the identified features university academic caring based on faculty perceptions.

Though the study is limited due to the sampling, UVI faculty's perception of AUAC was significantly evaluated. A model of UVI faculty caring intelligence was constructed from empirical evidence.

Studying caring intelligence of university faculty offered something new: a means to assess how faculty recognize the meaning of caring within themselves, their function, relationships and work environment. Caring intelligence can be used to predict faculty performance and their relationships within the university academic environment.

This paper presents recently published resources on library instruction and information literacy, providing an introductory overview and a selected annotated bibliography of publications covering various library types, study populations and research contexts.

This paper introduces and annotates English-language periodical articles, monographs, dissertations, reports and other materials on library instruction and information literacy published in 2020.

The paper provides a brief description of all 440 sources and highlights sources that contain unique or significant scholarly contributions.

The information may be used by librarians, researchers and anyone interested in a quick and comprehensive reference to literature on library instruction and information literacy.

Digital libraries promote and accelerate scientific research in academic institutions. The subscribed database resources of digital libraries have become an increasingly valuable asset for researchers. Database resources help generate new ideas, determine research directions and promote productive academic interaction between teachers and students in the information age. The purpose of this study is to examine the use of electronic resources by students in various databases, the research productivity of the faculty in the science network and the number of students who graduate each year.

This study uses a quantitative method to collect secondary data from the central database of the Higher Education Commission (HEC) for the population of 26 universities for 2 years (2015–2016). In addition to the HEC digital library, data was also collected from the Web of Science to determine the quality academic performance of faculty and researchers. Moreover, in the study, the total strength of teaching staff and doctoral faculty was extracted from the HEC website for investigation. The authors applied the Spearman’s correlation test to the secondary data using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 25.

The correlation results of the enrolled students and the downloaded papers from various databases were statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). However, the result showed a positive correlation (p < 0.05) between the use of selected/known databases from a number of databases accessed by the HEC. More importantly, it turns out that the faculty’s productivity in the scientific network and the number of students who graduated from public and private universities are found to be insignificant (p > 0.05). However, the authors found a positive correlation (p < 0.05) between doctoral and non-doctoral faculties, which show that a significant number of non-doctoral faculties are still actively involved in teaching and research.

Research based on academic activities by faculties and students, performed for the first time on the basis of secondary data, will help the HEC and university management to determine the right direction and develop plans to improve academic performance and research quality.

When developing online programs, institutions have a social responsibility to safeguard academic freedom. In the United States, a perceived lack of career relevance, declining enrollments, and a desire to expand institutional impact have compelled numerous institutions to create online degree programs. The decision to scale some online programs, in collaboration with for-profit online program managers, into enrollments in the thousands is seen by a number of faculty and professional organizations as evidence of the rise of neoliberalism, at the expense of academic freedom and faculty governance.

This chapter begins by setting the context for the discussion of academic freedom and online degree programs. I provide a review of the growth of online degree programs and discuss some of the reasons a campus might choose to take programs online, as some of the reasons reveal tensions impacting academic freedom. I follow with case examples and strategies that may help institutions balance online initiatives with practices that preserve academic freedom and quality. The chapter concludes that the challenges raised should not be framed as “either/or” choices – the examples provided demonstrate that academic freedom can and should be sustained, especially within large programs, regardless of being on-ground or online.