Campus Aerial Views

Aerial View of the FLorida International University University Park Campus.

Campus Aerial View

Aerial View of the FLorida International University University Park Campus.

Perkins+Will Meeting Agendas and 15 Campus Plans

Meeting agenda and documents from Meeting # 5 between the memebers of Perkins+Will and the FIU-AHSCMP Executive Planning Committee. Includes plans and blueprints detailing facility goals and assumptions for the Academic Health Sciences facility over a 5, 10, and 20 year planning period, as well as future goals. Blueprints include a Campus Plan and 5, 10, and 20 year plans for the Program, Space, Service, and Access, as well as a Site Plan, and Perspective View of the facilities.

Programs of Study. Florida International University. North Miami Campus. [1977/06-1977/08]

https://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/catalogs/1061/thumbnail.jpg

The socialization of adjunct faculty into the academic culture of a public community college campus

This study investigated the socialization of adjunct faculty into the academic culture of a community college campus. Because of the increased utilization of adjunct faculty, the need to socialize them to effectively function within the organizational culture has become more acute. A review of the literature revealed that when employees are socialized, they are more committed to the goals and welfare of the organization, are less likely to leave the organization, and are more productive and innovative. Therefore, it is important that administrators have programs and practices in place that would help to integrate adjunct faculty into the academic culture. The model of organizational socialization (Chao, O'Leary-Kelly, Wolf, Klein, & Gardner, 1994) formed the framework for this study, which was guided by the following research questions: How do adjunct faculty members describe their socialization into the culture of their college campus? How do administrators describe their roles and that of the organization in the socialization of adjunct faculty members? What organizational programs and activities are in place for the socialization of adjunct faculty? The North Campus of Miami Dade College was the site for this study, as it is a campus with a long history of utilizing adjunct faculty members and one that has a clearly-stated mission of adjunct faculty socialization. A qualitative case study method was used, and data collection included interviews and the review and analysis of institutional documents. The participants included 11 adjunct faculty members, 4 department chairpersons, the campus president, and the college training and development coordinator. The study revealed that there were structured and consistent professional development programs, but these conflicted with the schedules of adjunct faculty. Overall, adjunct faculty found support from the leadership; however, they revealed a need for more mentoring, more interactions with full-time faculty, and more input in decision making concerning textbooks and curricula. Implications and recommendations for practice include making professional development more accessible and relevant to adjunct faculty, developing a formal mentoring program where full-time faculty and veteran adjunct faculty mentor novice adjunct faculty, and involving adjuncts in decisions regarding curriculum and textbook selection.

Profiling The Campus Recruiter At A Four-Year Hospitality Program

Profiling the Campus Recruiter At a Four-Year Hospitality Program, is a written profile, supported by anecdotal rather than stridently empirical evidence, by Al lzzolo, Assistant Professor, College of Hotel Administration, University of Nevada, Las Vegas. “Each year major chain corporations as well as single unit companies interview hospitality students throughout the country. A study conducted at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, was designed to profile the hospitality industry campus recruiter and to provide meaningful data to college students who would be interviewing with these recruiters,” the author initially proffers. “Recruiting at the four-year hospitality program, by its nature, is not a science, nor is it highly quantifiable. The interviewing and selection processes are highly subjective and vary from company to company,” says Izzolo to preface his essay. “Data were collected via a questionnaire specifically designed to answer questions about the recruiters and/or the companies that sent interviewers to the placement office of the university's hospitality program,” our author says to explain the process used to gather information for the piece. Findings of the study indicate that the typical recruiter is male, college educated – but not necessarily in a Hospitality’ curriculum – and almost 80 percent of respondents said they had the authority to hire management trainees. Few campuses are visited by hospitality industry recruitment staff as evidenced by Izzolo’s observations/data. Table 3 analyzes the desirable traits a recruiter deems appropriate for the potential employee candidate. Personal appearance, work experience, grade point average, and verbal communication rank high on the list of distinguishable attributes. The most striking finding in this portion of the study is that a student’s GPA is virtually ignored. “Recruiting for the hospitality industry appears to be very subjective,” Izzolo says. “Recruiters are basing decisions to hire not on knowledge levels as determined by an academic grade point average but rather on criteria much less definitive, such as verbal skills and personal appearance,” our author opines. In closing, Izzolo concedes this is not a definitive study, but is merely a launching pad to a more comprehensive investigation on the recruitment subject.

Campus Recruitment: A Four-Year Program Profile

A hospitality recruiter profile survey is replicated nine years after the initial study to ascertain if any meaningful changes have occurred among recruiters that might have an effect upon college students and the interviewing process today.

Campus Recruitment: Four-Year Program Profile

A hospitality recuriter profile survey is replicated 18 years after the initial study and nine years from the last study to determine if recruiers and their opinions have significantly changed and what impact these changes may have on college students and the interviewing process.

Risk -taking propensity of faculty, administrators, and academic department heads at a large, urban, multi -campus community college

This research was undertaken to explore dimensions of the risk construct, identify factors related to risk-taking in education, and study risk propensity among employees at a community college. Risk-taking propensity (RTP) was measured by the 12-item BCDQ, which consisted of personal and professional risk-related situations balanced for the money, reputation, and satisfaction dimensions of the risk construct. Scoring ranged from 1.00 (most cautious) to 6.00 (most risky).^ Surveys including the BCDQ and seven demographic questions relating to age, gender, professional status, length of service, academic discipline, highest degree, and campus location were sent to faculty, administrators, and academic department heads. A total of 325 surveys were returned, resulting in a 66.7% response rate. Subjects were relatively homogeneous for age, length of service, and highest degree.^ Subjects were also homogeneous for risk-taking propensity: no substantive differences in RTP scores were noted within and among demographic groups, with the possible exception of academic discipline. The mean RTP score for all subjects was 3.77, for faculty was 3.76, for administrators was 3.83, and for department heads was 3.64.^ The relationship between propensity to take personal risks and propensity to take professional risks was tested by computing Pearson r correlation coefficients. The relationships for the total sample, faculty, and administrator groups were statistically significant, but of limited practical significance. Subjects were placed into risk categories by dividing the response scale into thirds. A 3 x 3 factorial ANOVA revealed no interaction effects between professional status and risk category with regard to RTP score. A discriminant analysis showed that a seven-factor model was not effective in predicting risk category.^ The homogeneity of the study sample and the effect of a risk-encouraging environment were discussed in the context of the community college. Since very little data on risk-taking in education is available, risk propensity data from this study could serve as a basis for comparison to future research. Results could be used by institutions to plan professional development activities, designed to increase risk-taking and encourage active acceptance of change. ^

Efficacy of educational interventions to reduce homophobia on the *college campus

Homophobic attitudes, irrational fears and negative attitudes against gay men and lesbians exist on the college campus (Lance, 2002; Rankin, 2003). Educators wishing to change these attitudes need to know what types of intervention would be effective. This investigation empirically assessed the degree of homophobia in a group of college students, and changes in the degree of homophobia following two levels of educational intervention that were rooted in educational theories and social contact theory. A 25-item scale developed by Hudson and Ricketts to measure the degree of negative attitudes toward gay men and lesbians was used in English classes at a southeastern university. This study examined the relationship between different demographic groups and the degree of change obtained as a result of the interventions. ^ Findings did not suggest that either interaction with gay men and lesbians in the form of a speaker panel or viewing a “coming out” episode of the Ellen show reduced homophobia to a significant extent. Results did demonstrate the Caribbeans and right wing authoritarians tend to be more homophobic. Post hoc analysis investigated factors that may have contaminated the interventions. Speaker Identification was a significant predictor of change in degree of homophobia. ^