Asee peer logo

Faculty Roles And Rewards: Scholarship And Teaching Reexamined

Download Paper |


2000 Annual Conference


St. Louis, Missouri

Publication Date

June 18, 2000

Start Date

June 18, 2000

End Date

June 21, 2000



Page Count


Page Numbers

5.295.1 - 5.295.6

Permanent URL

Download Count


Request a correction

Paper Authors

author page

Ted D. Loso

author page

Raj Desai

author page

Michael E. Courbat

Download Paper |

NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract

Session 2348

Faculty Roles and Rewards: Scholarship & Teaching Reexamined

Ted Loso, Michael Courbat, Raj Desai Southeast Missouri State University Cape Girardeau, Missouri

I. Introduction

The last few years of the twentieth century have been a period of unprecedented change. The end of the Cold War, economic restructuring, and globalization have remade the planet in ways both unexpected and unplanned. Academic institutions are in many ways at the forefront of these changes in preparing students to join the workforce of the future. Changing faculty roles, a staggering increase in knowledge and the impact of information technology have all generated a need for greater flexibility among academic institutions. Many of the universities and colleges in America have analyzed the changes needed in terms of customer satisfaction and learning effectiveness only 4. Instructional Technology has become an important teaching tool in the classrooms of Colleges and Universities all over the country. Instructional Technology is still a new tool and as such, the benefits, cost of creation, and cost of implementation are still being realized. However, little consideration was given to the impact of these changes on faculty roles and rewards or on the process of applying new technology.

Universities and colleges have naively assumed that whatever modifications in methodology and technology are required would be eagerly adopted by their faculty. This has not been the case in an increasingly large segment of the America. Academic Vice Presidents are increasingly being pressured by their Boards of Regents, funding agencies and state legislatures to adopt new technology to become more efficient and effective as an academic enterprise. Yet the faculty charged with implementing these changes is at best both reluctant and tentative in their adoption. The reason for this divergence in administrative requirements and academic activity is that most faculty, unlike the administrators, have recognized the tremendous impact of these changes on their activities. Vastly increased time requirements, major changes in infrastructure and curriculum needs, coupled with questions about the validity of this learning approach and the present reward structure make widespread adoption of these technologies problematic.

The authors of this paper have been, both directly and indirectly, involved with adoption of web based learning activities to the courses offered by Southeast Missouri State University. Our experiences provide the basis for suggestions which might make this adoption process less stressful and more successful on your campus. Regardless of any advice given, the process of

Loso, T. D., & Desai, R., & Courbat, M. E. (2000, June), Faculty Roles And Rewards: Scholarship And Teaching Reexamined Paper presented at 2000 Annual Conference, St. Louis, Missouri.

ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2000 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015