The new faculty experience in planning is a transition and training period in which the new scholar begins to master the many tasks that are required in academic life. The authors investigated the quality and characteristics of the first two years of the new planning faculty experience through review of existing literature and analysis of original research. The findings indicate that many new professors in planning do not know what to expect and are generally not well prepared to assume their new roles. In particular, many new faculty were not trained in pedagogy or experienced in teaching, and so almost all of their first years are taken up with becoming reasonably proficient in their teaching.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bianco-Mathis, Virginia , and Neal Chalofsky, eds. 1998. The full-time faculty handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
2.
Boice, Robert . 1991. New faculty as teachers. Journal of Higher Education62 (2): 150-173.
3.
Boice, Robert . 1992. The new faculty member. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4.
Commission on the Doctorate in Planning . 1992. Report of the Commission on the Doctorate in Planning to the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning. Cambridge, MA: Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning.
5.
DeNeef, A. Leigh , and Craufurd D. Goodwin, eds. 1995. The academic’s handbook. 2d ed.Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
6.
Fink, L. D.1984. The first year of college teaching. In New directions for teaching and learning: No. 17. The first year of college teaching, edited by K. E. Eble. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7.
Heiberger, Mary Morris , and Julia Miller Vick. 1996. The academic job search handbook. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
8.
Irrepressible Women Planners (IWP) . 1989. How (not) to get ahead in academia: A guide for women planners. Tucson, AZ: Faculty Women’s Interest Group.
9.
Johnsrud, Linda K. , and Christine D. Atwater. 1993. Scaffolding the ivory tower: Building supports for faculty new to the academy. CUPA Journal44 (1): 1-14.
10.
Menges, Robert J.1996. Experiences of newly hired faculty. To Improve the Academy15: 169-182.
11.
Olsen, D. , and Mary Deane Sorcinelli. 1992. The pretenure years: A longitudinal perspective. In New directions for teaching and learning: No. 50. Developing new and junior faculty, edited by M. D. Sorcinelli and A. E. Austin. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
12.
Reynolds, Anne . 1992. Charting the changes in junior faculty: Relationships among socialization, acculturation, and gender. Journal of Higher Education63 (6): 638-652.
13.
Rosch, Teryl Ann , and Jill N. Reich. 1996. The enculturation of new faculty in higher education: A comparative investigation of three academic departments. Research in Higher Education37 (1): 115-131.
14.
Sawyer, R. McLaran , Keith W. Pritchard, and Karl D. Hostetler, eds. 1992. The art and politics of college teaching: A practical guide for the beginning professor. New York: P. Lang.
15.
Selke, Mary J. 1996. The Dr. Mom Project: Balancing personal and professional roles. Paper presented at the 1996 Way Up Conference. Waterloo, Iowa, 7 November.
16.
Shea, Mary Ann , and Andrew S. Knoedler. 1994. Becoming a teacher: From pedagogy to praxis. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching5 (2): 135-151.
17.
Sorcinelli, Mary Deane . 1988. Satisfaction and concerns of new university teachers. To Improve the Academy: Resources for Student, Faculty, and Institutional Development7: 121-133.
18.
Sorcinelli, Mary Deane . 1994. Effective approaches to new faculty development. Journal of Counseling and Development72: 474-479.
19.
Sorcinelli, Mary Deane , and Janet P. Near. 1989. Relations between work and life away from work among university faculty. Journal of Higher Education60 (1): 59-81.
20.
Toth, Emily . 1997. Ms. Mentor’s impeccable advice for women in academia. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
21.
Turner, J. L. , and Robert Boice. 1987. Start at the beginning: Concerns and needs of new faculty. To Improve the Academy6: 41-55.
