Re: Introduction and request for advice (fwd)

Carolin Kreber (ckreber@dewey.ed.BrockU.CA)
Fri, 9 Feb 1996 08:25:34 -0500 (EST)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 1996 10:58:38 -0500 (EST)
From: Carolin Kreber <ckreber@dewey.ed.BrockU.CA>
To: Chris Evans <>
Subject: Re: Introduction and request for advice

Hello again:

I greatly appreciate you comments Chris. I see your point that I didn't
provide enough information (I hope I won't provide too much information
now which will make for boring reading--however, thank you very much for
the invitation to elaborate on my study.)

Here it goes:
The fifteen elements will be different aspects of academic work (including
teaching, research, and service) which respondents
(full professors who have also won a teaching award and beginning
faculty) will construe. The elements were originally elicited from
a small group of experienced faculty from two Canadian universities and
were also verified with the relevant literature in the field.

The grids of experienced and less experienced faculty will be compared in
terms of complexity and integration. Analyses will include
extremity measures, variability of intensity, and interjudge agreement.
Correlations will be calculated for constructs and elements in hgrtids
of experienced and less experienced faculty. Factor analyses will be
conducted as well.

Some of the constructs I may provide. The majority of the constructs
(twenty in total) will be elicited on the basis of randomly selected
tiads. The triads will not carry a constant element.

The grid will be administered to faculty at various large
research universities in Canada.
The purpose of the study is to see whether faculty who have proven to be
successful in research and teaching (full professor/teaching award
winner) hold a more integrated and more complex
construct system about academic work than do new faculty (faculty who
have only recently been admitted to the professoriate). The
study is seen to have significant implications for faculty
development in universities.

Initially my
idea was to give a workshop on the use of the repertory
grid as a classroom assessment technique at the respective campuses
and have participants complete my grid at the end of the workshop.
(Either as a paper and pencil test or by using a computer--I do have
access to a computer program that could be used for that purpose)).
The advantage would have been that faculty would have had an incentive
for completing the grid for me (the workshop on grid methodology). I would
have also been available
for consultation should there have been questions on the grid procedure
itself. It turns out, however, that I won't be able to give such a
workshop at these campuses. As a result I will have to contact
potential participants by letter. This means that they will receive the grid,
together with instructions, in the mail. And I wonder whether they will
actually complete and return it. And that's my problem! Any ideas what I
could try?

Once again thanks for "listening". I hope this description of my study
isn't too thorough now!


Carolin Kreber
Instructional Development Office
Brock University, St. Catharines
Canada, L2S 3A1