A model for faculty workload decision-facilitation for higher education institutions

• Main Author: Medallon, Merlita Castillo
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Animo Repository 2005
• Subjects: Teachers > Workload; College teachers > Workload > Philippines; Universities and colleges > Philippines > Faculty; Educational Leadership
• Online Access: https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_doctoral/69; https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/context/etd_doctoral/article/1068/viewcontent/CDTG003835_P.pdf
• Institution: De La Salle University

The study identified the current workloading practices in selected colleges and universities for the purpose of developing a faculty workload decisionfacilitation model for higher education institutions (HEIs). The study utilized the descriptive and the theory building research methodology following Eisenhardts fundamental steps. Ten selected HEIs that either have Centers of Excellence (COEs), Centers of Development (CODs), or Level-3 accredited programs and those that offer the education, commerce, and engineering programs were the primary sources of data. Data on the workload distributions of the triple functions: instruction, research, and service were gathered through survey questionnaires and interviews with the faculty and the administrators, together with data records specifically the faculty manuals of the participant HEIs. Results of the study revealed that under instruction, three activities commonly observed across type of schools (COEs, CODs, Level-3) and program offering (education, commerce, engineering) were classroom teaching, class preparation, and evaluation of student accomplishments. Under research, majority of the faculty did library research the most, and research publication, the least. Under service, the faculty performed activities such as membership and/or participation in school governance and/or committees and participation in community extension projects. From the results of the study, it was found that there were no uniform policies, guidelines, or prescriptions as regards specific activities under each function, as well as unit and time allocations for each function within schools belonging to the same type or schools with the same program offering. No uniform instruction-research-service workload credit and time allocation could be prescribed for the participant schools. Within and across schools, differences in weekly time allocations for the three functions were generally dependent on the workload credit units assigned by the institution. There were selected faculty- and institutional/college/departmental-related factors that were likely to influence decisions regarding these concerns. Facultyrelated factors such as faculty specialization, educational attainment, and work experience, interest, and institutional prioritization of the three functions influenced decision regarding faculty workload distributions. In consideration of the research findings, it was recommended that the participant HEIs spell out required (obligatory) and additional faculty activities under each of the three functions for the guidance of both administrator and faculty and to reflect those in the faculty manuals. There is also a need on the part of these HEIs to review their policies on the allotment of credit units and faculty time for the three functions: instruction, research, and service in the light of institutional priorities. If an HEI desires to be a research institution, then it needs to allocate more credit units to the said function, with a corresponding decrease in the unit allocation for instruction. The problems encountered regarding faculty workload distribution did not vary according to type of HEI and program offering. In addition, the faculty suggested lighter teaching loads as a needed improvement in faculty workload distribution to allow them more time to do research. As such, the participant HEIs should consider the problems expressed by their faculty members as regards faculty workload distributions and attempt to respond to those problems. This was especially recommended for their concerns regarding heavy teaching loads that limit them from engaging in the other two functions. The model formulated summarized the descriptive, prescriptive, and predictive propositions emerging from the results. The faculty workload decisionfacilitation model considered three inputs: the identification of activities performed by faculty under each function, decisions on credit unit and time allocation, and consideration of the factors that influence faculty workload distribution. The propositions that emerged were in consonance with various literatures which further suggested external validity of the model proposed in the study. However, it was also recommended that similar researches covering other HEIs and that would cover other degree programs be conducted to validate the model.