Satisfied Community College Professors

I was interested to see IHE's recent report that professors at Community Colleges are more satisfied with their jobs than those at four-year colleges and universities.

Reporter Doug Lederman wrote that "professors at two-year institutions are more satisfied with their jobs than are their peers at four-year colleges, according to a survey of faculty attitudes by a research center at the University of California at Los Angeles."

Among full-time Community College profs, 81.5% said they were "very satisfied" or "satisfied" with their jobs, compared to 76.8% of four-year profs.  Almost three quarters (73%) of CC profs said that they "experienced joy in their work" "to a great extent", compared with 67% of the four-year folks.

Lederman's summary of the UCLA study implies that CC profs' satisfaction is due, at least in part, to their commitment to teaching less advantaged students.  He writes: "Community college faculty members are far likelier than those at four-year institutions to believe that their students are under-prepared for college work," however, 80% believe that their institutions take responsibility for educating these under-prepared students.  Only 60% of profs at 4 year colleges and universities believe that under-prepared students are well served at their institutions.

In addition, two-year-college instructors were more likely than those at four-year colleges to say that their “values are congruent with the dominant institutional values” where they worked..."

What does this study mean?  At first I was surprised by the findings -- given that most Community College professors have higher teaching loads and lower salaries than peers located at more prestigious institutions.

Perhaps these findings reflect the satisfaction we feel as teachers when we are able to help students who are dedicated to learning despite limited resources.

  My own experiences resonate with these findings.  I remember, as a graduate student, teaching "Child Development" and "Abnormal Psychology" to undergraduates at The City College of New York, located in Spanish Harlem.  It was the late 80's, crime was at its peak in New York City, but by the time I started teaching I was inured to the crack addicts who stood with hands outstretched as I emerged from the subway station and walked up the hill to a campus where elevators were usually broken and stairwells smelled of urine. 

CCNY is a 4-year University, and once had more Nobel Prize winners among its alumni than any other university - including Harvard and MIT.  However, an open enrollment program had been started in the 70's and when I taught there almost anyone with a high school degree could enroll.  That fact, along with very low tuition, meant that the academic skills and income level of most students were much lower than most college students. 

The majority of students enrolled in my classes were minorities.  The few white students were often recent immigrants, as were many of the students of color.  Most of my students were older than the average undergrad.  Many had young children and thus eagerly soaked up information about child development.  These students, especially the many non-native speakers, had great difficulty writing papers and struggled with the reading and tests.  Often, life crises made it hard for them to get to class, or hand in assignments on time.  Most worked full time jobs and still struggled to pay tuition.  Despite challenges, they were eager learners and motivated to be in class.  They were appreciative of my novice teaching efforts.  Unlike undergrads at more prestigious institutions, the CCNY students never acted like entitled consumers.  Unlike their more privileged counterparts, the CCNY students rarely complained or disdained.

I was honored to teach these students.  In many ways it was the most gratifying teaching experience I've ever had.

Is this the kind of student body and teaching experience that makes community college professors more likely to be satisfied and gratified than their 4 year counterparts?  Probably so.

On the other hand, I wonder whether the relative contentment of CC profs is correlated with less pressure to get grants, conduct research and publish?  Probably so.

I welcome your thoughts (and hope that the our favorite Community College Dean will weigh in on this issue.)

Postscript:  Dean Dad has written about his thoughts on satisfied cc profs.  He thinks that it has to do with clarity of mission. Be sure to read his great post and the thought-provoking comments of readers.  Interesting thoughts include those from Ancarett, Adjunct Kait, Dr. Crazy, New Kid and more....

Comments

[dean dad]

Thanks for the shout-out! I'm working on a full response, but the short version is that clarity of mission is the key. Top research universities, on the one side, and cc's, on the other, share the virtue of clarity of mission. Those frustrating midtier schools that are neither fish nor fowl -- we want to raise our academic profile, but we can't afford more money for professional development or reductions in teaching loads -- are far more frustrating.

[Jane]

I wonder if some of the satisfaction (I'm wildly speculating here) has to do with "clarity of job expectations" to some degree. One of my continuing frustrations with my own job is that the T&P guidelines are almost completely opaque. You never really know if you're doing "enough" research or if your teaching is "good enough" or how much service is "enough". Are the guidelines clearer at CCs?

[profgrrrrl]

Just some more speculation here ... the people I know who are at CCs generally are there because they genuinely do align themselves with that mission. From what I've seen of the CC hiring process, they're pretty careful to check those things out about candidates and not hire research wannabes or even uncertains.

At other types of schools I think that not only do the schools have sort of unclear missions (as others have pointed out) but so do many of the faculty. I've been working with students who think they *should* apply for jobs at research u's even though research stresses them out and they don't like it. Or who get hired at research schools and are good at research but really don't have their heart in it. Or who get hired at teaching schools and actually enjoy teaching but can't help but feel that they *should* be at research schools because that's what they trained for. So perhaps in other jobs there is more conflict between who we are/what we want and what we theoretically should want/be as faculty? Just a very speculative thought ...

[Carrie Shanafelt]

The allures of different kinds of universities certainly appeal to different sides of the instructor. Although the benefits (living wage, free copying, my own office, etc.) I had while a graduate instructor at a small private research university were wonderful, those aren't the kind of benefits that make a teacher into an advocate for her students. At that univ., I felt deeply appreciated by my superiors, but only mildly rewarded by the response of my mostly white upper-middle-class students.

During the year I taught at NYC College of Technology, my experience was the opposite. I had no copying rights, a four-desk office I shared with 40 other instructors, not enough wages to live on (I very often went hungry), and no faculty acknowledgement, but I had classes packed with mostly lower-class, underserved minority students who were extremely bright and dedicated and almost tearfully grateful at the effort I put into teaching.

Which experience would I describe as "more fulfilling"? Of course I'd respond City Tech, but the work environment was such that, when offered even slightly more pay and better conditions at another CUNY school, I had to grab it. My students were furious. Direct quote: "How could you leave us? You said you loved teaching here. All you care about is money!" I was floored that they would accuse me of being a hypocrite, but it's true that I was leaving students that I'd have gone into battle for.

Since leaving City Tech, I've told many first-time instructors headed out into the CUNY schools that they won't be able to do it if they act like it's a job. No one will see your work and pat you on the back and give you a raise. Your superiors only do an evaluation, often, to inform you of what you've done wrong, not to suggest you for promotions. Every leg-up I've gotten has been because of my interactions with my superiors outside the classroom. But that means that my teaching life gets to be this pure thing. It's not about impressing anyone or hoping for financial benefits, like other jobs are. My teaching, at CUNY, anyway, has been about how much I love getting students to challenge themselves and seeing their brains stretch open. Yes, it's cheesy, but that's a joy I have here that I wouldn't at have at a fancy private school that paid well.

The problem is this: If a more prestigious university called and said they wanted me, and they'd give me full health benefits, a truly respectable salary, small classes, time to research, wonderful colleagues, etc., how could I say no? I would like to think I would say no, but I've been without real insurance so long the idea of going to a doctor is a temptation too great to pass up. This exact scenario has happened to several of the greatest minds to teach at CUNY. Some of them go, and it's hard to blame them.

[Carrie Shanafelt]

Upon rereading, I realized I should make it much more clear that I am a Ph.D. student. In CUNY, there is no significant difference between a graduate instructor and a non-TT instructor, so it's rather easy to imagine a lifetime-long version of the job.