This article was downloaded by: [University of California Santa Cruz]On: 10 October 2014, At: 20:38Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,London W1T 3JH, UK

Community College Journalof Research and PracticePublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ucjc20

PERCEPTIONS OFCOMMUNITY COLLEGEFACULTY ABOUT THENEED FOR GERONTOLOGYTRAININGGary K. Mayfield a & Ames F. Tryon aa Geriatric Education Center , Universityof Mississippi Medical Center , Jackson,Mississippi, USAPublished online: 09 Jul 2006.

To cite this article: Gary K. Mayfield & Ames F. Tryon (1997) PERCEPTIONS OFCOMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY ABOUT THE NEED FOR GERONTOLOGY TRAINING,Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 21:5, 501-508, DOI:10.1080/1066892970210504

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1066892970210504

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of allthe information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on ourplatform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensorsmake no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Anyopinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions andviews of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information.

Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly inconnection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private studypurposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of accessand use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 20:

38 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

PERCEPTIONS OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTYABOUT THE NEED FOR GERONTOLOGY TRAINING

Gary K. Mayfield and Ames F. TryonGeriatric Education Center, University of Mississippi Medical Center,Jackson, Mississippi, USA

America is aging, and quickly. Among the educational institutions that couldaddress this critical issue, none are better suited than community colleges. Commu-nity colleges not only educate students but also respond to the emerging needs of thecommunities they serve. Previous studies have shown that few community collegeshave developed an agenda for addressing the impact of aging on our society and thatfaculty and administrators may not be aware of the potential for expanding aging-related programs. This study reports the responses of 703 community college facultyrepresenting a broad variety of disciplines and educational backgrounds. As ex-pected, the majority of faculty had little previous training in aging, included no agingcontent in existing courses, and were uncertain as to whether to include aging contentin other courses that they taught. This uncertainty, however, must be tempered bythe fact that 61% of the responding faculty were interested in attending a basictraining program in aging. Such community college faculty interest and participa-tion could enhance the introduction of aging materials into existing curricula andexpand their other educational activities that would ultimately benefit older personsin the community.

The United States is an aging nation. By the year 2000, 22% of thepopulation will be more than 55 years of age, and the median age willbe approximately 36. By the end of the third decade of the 21st century,the median age will increase to 42, and 33% of the population will exceed55 years of age. This dramatic demographic shift from the youth-oriented society of the 20th century will have a profound effect on everyinstitution in this nation in the early decades of the 21st century (U.S.Senate Special Committee on Aging, 1991).

The aging of the U.S. population is creating a demand for neweducational paradigms to meet the needs of older persons and those whoprovide services for them. There are already indications that educa-

Address correspondence to Gary K. Mayfield, University of Mississippi Medical Center,Geriatric Education Center, Jackson, Mississippi 39216-4505, USA.

Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 21:501-508,1997Copyright © 1997 Taylor & Francis

1066-8926/97 $12.00 + .00 501

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 20:

38 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

502 G. K. MAYFIELD AND A. F. TRYON

tional institutions and the various agencies that fund new educationalendeavors are aware of this emerging trend. Programs have beenlaunched to establish centers on aging, gerontology programs, geriatriceducation centers, and career tracks specializing in aging within tradi-tional disciplines. Likewise, educational institutions are beginning torealize that learning is a lifelong process. As a result, many efforts havebeen made to develop personal enrichment programs for older adults aswell as educational efforts aimed at enhancing the ability of olderworkers to remain competent in a changing and challenging labormarket (Beckman & Ventura-Merkel, 1992; Rappole, 1977).

Among the array of educational institutions that could address theissues associated with an aging United States, none are better poised torespond than community and junior colleges. Although traditional 4-year colleges or universities can have a significant impact on careerdevelopment for entry-level members of the labor force, community andjunior colleges are capable of addressing a broader array of problemsand issues. Community and junior colleges not only provide basiceducation to persons aspiring to continue their learning activities be-yond the associate's degree level, they also respond to the emergingneeds of the communities they serve. This response includes earlypreparation for further education, technical training to prepare forspecific jobs, and outreach efforts targeted at improving the quality oflife for the community being served (McComb Community College, 1991;Ventura-Merkel & Doucette, 1993).

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Previous studies of community and junior colleges have suggested thatonly a small percentage of these institutions have developed strategicplans for meeting the future needs of an aging population. Ventura-Merkel and Doucette (1993) surveyed 1,288 community colleges todetermine the extent to which these institutions have developed pro-grams that would meet the needs of older people. Among the 30% thatprovided completed surveys, they found that fewer than half had aging-oriented activities. Similar findings were reported by Terry and Jaques(1983), Peters and Stunkel (1987), and Rappole (1977).

The fact that so few community and junior colleges have developedan agenda for aging suggests that faculty and administrators may notbe aware of the potential for expanding programs in aging-related areas.As a result of their studies, several authors have suggested strategiesfor advancing the agenda. For example, Ventura-Merkel and Doucette(1993) authored a 7-point action agenda that included specific needsassessments, mobility of successful models, and faculty development.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 20:

38 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

PERCEPTIONS ABOUT GERONTOLOGY TRAINING 503

Similar suggestions were made earlier by Carbone (1982); Peterson,Wendt, and Douglas (1991), and Rich, Connelly, and Douglas (1990).

The relatively low response rate to recent surveys and the findingthat so few colleges have organized programs suggests two things. First,administrators and faculty have limited knowledge about expandingtheir efforts in aging-related areas. Second, these faculty and adminis-trators may possess the knowledge but are unwilling to take actionbecause of factors unrelated to the emerging needs of an aging popula-tion. For example, Maxwell and Kazlauskas (1992) reviewed the re-search on faculty development in community and junior colleges andfound that faculty were resistant to learning new instructional tech-niques that involve global concepts. Instead, faculty were interested inbecoming experts in particular disciplines. This article suggests thatfaculty development may be a major issue in the incorporation of agingcontent into the curriculum.

Although there is general support for the concept that communityand junior colleges can play an important role in meeting the needs ofan aging society, there is some skepticism regarding the willingness offaculty and administrators to alter traditional routines to incorporatenew programs. For example, a report published by McComb CommunityCollege (1991) found that there were 10 issues facing community andjunior colleges that would impair change, including faculty prepared-ness for the future. Similar findings were reported by Maxwell andKazlauskas (1992).

After reviewing the existing literature, it is obvious that furtherresearch needs to be done regarding the propensity for community andjunior colleges to develop new programs to meet the emerging needs ofan aging society. Nationwide surveys are useful, but they do not providethe type of information that can be used by administrators and individ-ual faculty to make specific changes. This can only be done by conductingcase studies that can be replicated elsewhere. This article reports onesuch study.

The first step in advancing the agenda in developing aging programsin community and junior colleges is to determine if faculty members arewilling to introduce aging content or are willing to acquire more knowl-edge on the possibilities. This article addresses this issue by reportingsome of the results of a project aimed at faculty and curriculum devel-opment in aging at seven community and junior colleges. We obtaineddata for the report as part of a larger effort to develop a statewidetraining network linking a geriatric education center to educationalunits located throughout the state of Mississippi. The goal of the projectwas to develop the community and junior college as a training site forpracticing professionals and elderly residents and to provide community

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 20:

38 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

504 G. K. MAYFIELD AND A. F. TRYON

and junior college faculty with the training and technical assistancenecessary to advance this agenda.

METHOD

The study population for this report consisted of faculty at sevencommunity and junior colleges located in the state of Mississippi.Mississippi was the first state in the United States to establish astatewide system of comprehensive 2-year colleges (Young & Ewing,1978). In 1992, there were approximately 69,228 students enrolled inthe state's 15 community and junior colleges, at 33 campuses. It isestimated that 60% of all high school graduates in Mississippi attend acommunity or junior college as their first exposure to post-high schooleducation. Of those enrolled in academic programs at these institutions,66% continue their education at 4-year institutions both within andoutside the state of Mississippi (State Board for Community and JuniorColleges, 1992).

We distributed survey questionnaires to all faculty members at theseven community and junior colleges. The purpose of the survey was toidentify faculty members who would be interested in participating in afaculty development program sponsored by the Mississippi GeriatricEducation Center. In addition to basic demographic information, eachrespondent was asked to provide data on previous training in aging,courses currently taught, and the aging content in these courses. Thefaculty were also asked if they wanted to enhance existing courses withaging content and whether they would be interested in participating intraining programs focused on aging issues or were involved specificgoal-directed activities such as curriculum projects.

RESULTS

Completed questionnaires were returned by 703 (58%) of the 1,208faculty members employed at the seven community and junior colleges.These faculty reported teaching 1,135 courses, with an average courseenrollment of 36 students. If these figures were extrapolated to includenonresponding faculty, we would estimate a potential impact on 43,931students in the seven participating community and junior colleges and,eventually, 1,980 faculty and 69,085 students in the 15 community andjunior colleges and their 33 campuses statewide.

We analyzed data from the questionnaires to determine the charac-teristics of the respondent group and if these characteristics had anybearing on their activities and interests in aging. The findings arepresented in two tables.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 20:

38 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

PERCEPTIONS ABOUT GERONTOLOGY TRAINING 505

Table 1 contains information pertaining to the current status of therespondents, their disciplines, educational background, and previous train-ing in aging. As indicated, most had no previous training in aging. Nursingfaculty were the one exception in that 56% had some previous exposure toaging coursework. In terms of discipline areas represented by the respon-dents and educational background, the majority of faculty respondents weremaster's-level trained and represented a broad array of discipline areas.

To inquiries concerning interest in enhancing current course contentin aging or including aging content in courses where none exists, wefound a pattern suggesting that the majority of faculty members wereuncertain whether aging content should be included. This patternpersisted across disciplines, educational backgrounds, and whether thefaculty members had previous training in the field of aging. Compari-sons by discipline for the questions about including more aging contentin existing courses suggested that the health-related professions weremore certain about the need to expand courses to include aging content,

TABLE 1 Comparisons of current activities and interests in aging

Respondents

Total respondents(AT =703)Discipline area

Allied Health (re = 109)Vo-tech (re = 109)Basic sciences (n = 107)Business (re = 102)Humanities (re 94)Nursing (n = 77)Social sciences (re = 69)Other (re = 36)

Educational backgroundBachelor's or less (re = 86)Master's (re = 484)Doctorate or profes-

sional (re = 63)Previous aging training

Yes (re = 99)No (re = 604)

Previoustraining

Yes

14

11755

15561014

201314

NANA

No

86

8993959585449086

808786

NANA

Activity or interest (%)

Enhance aging

Yes

20

2217174

164036

3

221827

3617

content

No

26

29343533141222

8

272521

928

DK

55

4949496370484289

515752

5555

Include aging

Yes

22

35172114183129

3

292037

3220

content

No

18

15202326198

173

152013

520

DK

60

5163566163615494

566051

6360

Note. DK = don't know; NA = not applicable.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 20:

38 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

506 G. K. MAYFIELD AND A. F. TRYON

followed by the social sciences and the basic sciences. Instructors in thehumanities, business, and vocational education were less certain. It isalso interesting to note that there were no differences in interests byeducational background or previous exposure to aging content.

Table 2 contains data that are indicative of faculty's interest in partici-pating in further learning activities. Although the majority of respondentswere uncertain whether they would attend a short seminar on aging orparticipate in curriculum projects, at least 61% would attend a basic courseon aging issues. These patterns persisted regardless of discipline, educa-tional background, or previous involvement in aging training programs.

DISCUSSION

Previous reports in this area have suggested that community and juniorcolleges are fertile ground for curriculum projects and elder-centered

TABLE 2 Comparisons of future training interests in aging

Respondents

Total respondents(AT =703)Discipline area

Allied health (n = 109)Vo-tech (re = 109)Basic sciences (re = 107)Business (re = 102)

Humanities (re = 94)Nursing (re = 77)Social sciences (re = 69)Other (re = 36)

Educational backgroundBachelor's or less (re = 86)Master's (re = 484)Doctorate or profes-

sional (n = 63)Previous aging training

Yes (re = 99)No (re = 604)

Attend shortseminar

Yes

38

2045353949342583

483830

4737

No

9

3148

111013133

992

810

DK

53

7741585042536214

435268

4654

Training interests (%)

Attend basicissues in aging

Yes

61

6656535564735967

726062

8058

No

32

3134383830253517

213430

1835

DK

7

31087636

17

768

28

Participate incurriculum

Yes

23

1628151733252047

382216

3521

project

No

21

724243019211925

142314

1622

DK

56

7748615348556128

485570

4957

Note. DK = don't know.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 20:

38 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

PERCEPTIONS ABOUT GERONTOLOGY TRAINING 507

activities (Ventura-Merkel & Doucette, 1993). If such endeavors are tobe successful, they will require administrative and faculty support (Richet al., 1990). This preliminary study of faculty interest in aging atcommunity and junior colleges revealed several patterns that should beuseful for gerontologists interested in developing aging-related pro-gramming in this type of educational institution.

As would be expected, the proportion of faculty members with formaltraining in aging was relatively small. As a result, the majority of thoseresponding to the survey were somewhat equivocal concerning theintroduction of aging content into the curriculum. The only exceptionswere found in nursing and allied health where graduates pursue careersthat provide direct care to older persons. The community and juniorcollege has the power to influence younger people in their career choices,to provide educational growth opportunities for older adults, and toimprove the quality of life for older persons in the community served bythe college. If this resource is to be fully developed, it will be necessaryfor the gerontology community to provide the training and technicalsupport to faculty and administrators from these entities.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Our study provides some indication that faculty from community andjunior colleges are willing to undertake structured training to learnmore about aging. By providing this type of training, it may be possibleto generate interest among community and junior college faculty ineither the introduction of aging materials into existing curricula or inexpanding their interest in other educational activities that could ulti-mately benefit older persons.

On the basis of our findings, we would recommend that geriatriceducation centers and other programs that focus on faculty developmentwork closely with community and junior colleges in several ways. First,faculty development programs that will provide faculty with formaltraining in geriatrics and gerontology should be organized. Second,gerontological experts should be able to provide interested faculty withtechnical assistance as they develop new programs. Finally, effortsshould be made to establish aging centers at community and juniorcolleges that will serve as catalysts for curriculum change, adult educa-tion, and community-oriented service programs.

REFERENCES

Beckman, B. M., & Ventura-Merkel, C. (1992). Community college programs forolder adults: A resource directory of guidelines, comprehensive programming

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 20:

38 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

508 G. K. MAYFIELD AND A. F. TRYON

models, and selected programs. Laguna Hills, CA: League for Innovation inthe Community College.

Carbone, J. (1982). Americans in transition: Implications for community col-leges of a new study about adult learners. Community /Junior College Quar-terly, 7, 61-69.

Maxwell, W. E., & Kazlauskas, E. J. (1992). Which faculty development methodsreally work in community colleges? A review of research. Community / JuniorCollege Quarterly, 16, 351-360.

McComb Community College. (1991). The top ten issues facing America's com-munity colleges. Warren, MI: Institute for Future Studies.

Peters, G. R., & Stunkel, E. L. (1987). Rural AGE: Accessing gerontologicaleducation. Kansas State University: Manhattan Center for Aging.

Peterson, D. A., Wendt, P. F., & Douglas, E. B. (1991). Determining the impactof gerontology preparation on personnel in the aging network: A nationalsurvey. Washington, DC: Association of Gerontology in Higher Education.

Rappole, G. H. (1977). An overview of community college programs for elderlyTexans. Community /Junior College Research Quarterly, 1, 363-387.

Rich, T. A., Connelly, J. R., & Douglas, E. B. (1990). Standards and guidelinesfor gerontology programs. Washington, DC: Association for Gerontology inHigher Education.

State Board for Community and Junior Colleges. (1992). Mississippi's commu-nity and junior colleges. Jackson, MS: State Board for Community and JuniorColleges.

Terry, J. A., & Jacques, E. (1983). A statewide program network that works(NCCSCE Working Paper Series). National Council on Community Servicesand Continuing Education. Arnold, MD: Anne Arundel Community College.

U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging. (1991). Aging America: Trends andprojections. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and HumanServices.

Ventura-Merkel, C, & Doucette, D. (1993). Community colleges in an agingsociety. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 17, 75-86.

Young, J. B., & Ewing, J. M. (1978). The Mississippi public junior college story:The first fifty years 1922-1972. Jackson: University Press of Mississippi.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

alif

orni

a Sa

nta

Cru

z] a

t 20:

38 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014