A speculative systems model of the dynamic interaction among students, faculty and administration in the community college, with particular reference to intrinsic motivation and the teacher-administrator interface

The challenge the community college faces in helping meet the needs of the living open system of society is examined in this study. It is postulated that internalization student outcomes are required by society to reduce entropy and remain self-renewing. Such behavior is characterized as having an intrinsically motivated energy source and displays the seeking and conquering of challenge, the development of reflective knowledge and skill, full use of all capabilities, internal control, growth orientation, high self-esteem, relativistic thinking and competence. The development of a conceptual systems model that suggests how transactions among students, faculty and administration might occur to best meet the needs of internalization outcomes in students, and intrinsic motivation in faculty is a major purpose of this study. It is a speculative model that is based on a synthesis of a wide variety of variables. Empirical evidence, theoretical considerations, and speculative ideas are gathered together from researchers and theoretici.ans who are working on separate answers to questions of intrinsic motivation, internal control and environments that encourage their development. The model considers the effect administrators·have on faculty anq the corresponding effect faculty may have on students. The major concentration is on the administrator--teacher interface.For administrators the model may serve as a guide in planning effective transactions, and establishing system goals. The teacher is offered a means to coordinate actions toward a specific overall objective, and the administrator, teacher and researcher are invited to use the model to experiment, innovate, verify the assumptions on which the model is based, and raise additional hypotheses. Goals and history of the community colleges in Ontario are examined against current problems, previous progress and open system thinking. The nature of the person as a five part system is explored with emphasis on intrinsic motivation. The nature, operation, conceptualization, and value of this internal energy source is reviewed in detail. The current state of society, education and management theory are considered and the value of intrinsically motivating teaching tasks together with "system four" leadership style are featured. Evidence is reviewed that suggests intrinsically motivated faculty are needed, and "system four" leadership style is the kind of interaction-influence system needed to nurture intrinsic motivation in faculty.

Psychopathy and Aggression: Examining the Role of Empathy

Empirical research has consistently demonstrated a positive association between psychopathic traits and physical aggression (Campbell, Porter, & Santor, 2004; Gretton, Hare, & Catchpole, 2004; Raine et aI., 2006; Spain, Douglas, Poythress, & Epstein, 2004). Moreover, research has also found that the emotional/interpersonal (Factor 1) psychopathy traits tend to be more closely associated with goal oriented, proactive aggression, whereas the social deviance (Factor 2) psychopathy characteristics have been more closely linked to reactive aggression, which is perpetrated in response to threat or provocation (Flight & Forth, 2007). Blair (2004; 2005; 2006) has recently proposed the Integrated Emotions Systems Model (lES), which posits that the association between Factor 1 psychopathy traits and proactive aggression is due to amygdala dysfunction leading to failed moral socialization. Consequently, individuals who exhibit Factor 1 psychopathy traits do not experience affective empathy in response to distress cues exhibited by others, thus, preventing the inhibition of proactive aggression. The current investigation sought to test this model by examining the associations among the emotional/interpersonal (Factor 1) psychopathy traits, proactive aggression, and affective empathy. After accounting for head injury, Factor 2 psychopathy traits, reactive aggression, and cognitive empathy, it was hypothesized that 1) Factor 1 psychopathy traits would predict proactive aggression, and 2) that affective empathy is a common cause of Factor 1 psychopathy traits, proactive aggression, and of the relationship between these two constructs. This hypothesis assumed that (a) affective empathy would uniquely predict Factor 1 psychopathy traits, (b) that affective empathy would uniquely predict proactive aggression, and (c) that affective empathy would account for the relationship between Factor I psychopathy traits and proactive aggression. The total sample consisted of 137 male undergraduate students. Participants completed measures of psychopathy (SRP III; Paulhus, Hemphill, & Hare, in press), aggression (PCS; Marsee, Kimonis, & Frick, 2004; RPQ; Raine et at, 2006), dispositional cognitive and affective empathy (BES; Jolliffe & Farrington, 2006; TES; Spreng, McKinnon, Mar, & Levine, 2009), and situational cognitive and affective empathy in response to neutral and empathy eliciting video clips. Physiological indices (heart rate & electrodermal activity) of affective empathy were also obtained while participants viewed the neutral and empathy eliciting videos. Findings indicated that Factor I psychopathy traits predicted proactive aggression. In addition, results demonstrated that affective empathy predicted both Factor I psychopathy traits and proactive aggression. However, the association between affective empathy and proactive aggression appeared to be dependent on the conceptualization and measurement of affective empathy. Conversely, affective empathy did not appear to account for the relationship between Factor I psychopathy traits and proactive aggression. Overall, results demonstrated partial support for the IES model. Implications of the results, limitations of the study and future research directions are discussed.