Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to compare procedures used to implement the Flex Calendar Program for staff development and to identify activities offered by five selected California Community Colleges. Deans of instruction, division heads, department chairs and individual faculty members were interviewed concerning their roles in the process and perceptions of how the program was implemented, structured and assessed in their own institution. Both institutional- and individual-based staff development needs were analyzed. Methodology. Data were collected from the five institutions through semistructured interviews as well as examination of archival data. Comparisons were made regarding the perceptions of respondents within each institution as well as across institutions. A one-way analysis of variance was conducted to determine if there were significant differences regarding perceptions of the success of the program based upon the role of the interviewee. Findings and conclusions. This study found that there was no significant difference in perceived success of the flexible calendar based on interviewee role either within or across colleges. Similarities were apparent in: the stated purpose of the Flexible Calendar Program which was to provide staff development activities and existence of internal knowledge of descriptions, process, and determination of staff development needs. Differences among colleges included: how plans are approved, monitoring processes, determination of impact of staff development activities on classroom learning, and evaluation of the flexible calendar program. Recommendations. Colleges should consider establishing: (1) a timely theme each year to build staff development activities around, (2) systematic monitoring and evaluation process to provide more meaningful choices of activities, and (3) processes to measure the impact of these activities on classroom instruction.