| In this exploratory study, the researcher observed the behavior of faculty at four small state colleges during a period of great turmoil. The investigation focused on five questions: (1) How faculty members defined themselves and their situation? (2) How much group cohesiveness was demonstrated by the faculty as a group? (3) How the faculty viewed itself in relation to other groups? (4) What type of actions and responses faculty utilized in meeting challenges? (5) How did the faculty judge itself and other groups?;The primary purpose of this study was to explore and examine the perspective of the faculty using participant observation techniques. To do this, the research was conducted in the work setting of the faculty during the 1978-79 academic year.;The participant observation design and methodology used in this study included direct observation, informant interviewing, document analysis, respondent interviewing, and shadowing. Data collection, analysis, hypothesis generation and hypothesis testing was carried on simultaneously throughout the investigation.;Data was collected from a variety of formal and informal settings. The information was typed in a narrative fashion. The data was then summarized and tabulated in order to construct a mathematical model of plausibility. In the case of this study, less than 2% of the 2,295 pieces of data did not support the faculty perspective.;After using an inductive process, the central theme began to evolve for the study. A faculty perspective emerged that was based on maintaining the status quo in the face of declining student enrollments and financial resources. In reporting on the perspective, the findings were divided into three categories consistent with the research questions. They are as follows: (1) definition of the situation, (2) actions taken, and, (3) criteria of judgement.;In reporting the definition of the situation, five subcategories of information were established. They are definitions of other groups and themselves, definition of power, rules and procedures, rewards and punishment, and goals. In each of these categories, faculty views were very consistent across the system. They basically defined the situation based on a historical perspective "the good old days".;Faculty actions taken also showed a consistency with them taking actions that followed consistent styles and patterns of behavior: both as groups and as individuals. The action appeared to be more action for action sake.;The faculty saw others in their setting as "good" or "bad". They made these judgements about other faculty, students, administrators, and those off their campus based on the amount of support they received.;This study seemed particularly relevant because other colleges across the country are facing similar issues. Also, the study would suggest the findings are generalizable, since it replicates a study conducted at Salem State College in Massachusetts, where the findings were similar. If the two are representative, it may mean that higher education can look forward to a series of conflicts where faculty resist change in the face of declining resources. |
