Effectiveness of Faculty Development Programme for the Young
Faculty of Universities and Colleges
J. Jasmine
1
and Rita Rani Mandal
2
1
St. Christopher’s College of Education, Chennai-600007, India
2
Lady Willingdon IASE, Chennai, India
Keywords Learning Outcomes, Learning Experiences, Assessment.
Abstract: Faculty members of Higher Educational Institutions are recruited with a mandatory qualification such as NET/
SET/SLET/Ph.D. The effect of such recruitment without an overview of teaching attributes such as –
Importance of Learning Outcomes, Learning Experiences and Learner’s Appraisal, ways to connect with Gen
Z community etc…leads to great damage to the learner’s community and also to teacher’s level of confidence.
The emerging need was felt and thereby this package of FDP came into action. Young faculty members with
an experience of less than 5 years in the teaching profession with a longingness for teaching are identified by
the Heads of the institutions and are sent for this training programme. 70 faculty members from 32 higher
educational institutions took part in the training extensively. A pre-test was conducted before the
commencement of the training programme. After a well-planned schedule of technical sessions and training
sessions are over, a post-test is conducted to verify the effectiveness of the training programme. The data
collected were analysed with SPSS and found that the training programme provided was very useful for the
faculty members. The study revealed that the FDP was very effective.
1 INTRODUCTION
In the modern era, the role of young faculty of
colleges and universities are multidimensional and
challenging. It is important these days for teachers to
update their teaching skills and pedagogical skills to
teach GenZ learners. It is necessary for teachers to
stay relevant and connected to the needs of learners.
Hence, the rapidly changing world needs upgraded
and updated teachers who are willing to learn.
Teachers of Higher Education Institutions need to
identify the innate abilities of students and channelize
their energy appropriately. Therefore, the teachers
should be knowledgeable in different teaching
methods, the dynamics of the classroom and
teaching-learning process. The primary objective of
this program is to enable the young faculty of
Colleges and Universities to acquire knowledge and
skills to improve teaching teaching-learning process.
It will serve as an instrument to prepare them for the
present-day classroom and they will be able to plan
suitable learning experiences for their students. The
objective of this program is to enable the young
faculty of Colleges and Universities to enrich on the
use of Backward Design in the Teaching Learning
Process, to understand, Universal design for
Learning, to acquire basic teaching skills through
Micro-teaching technique, to get familiarized with
different active learning methods, to develop an
understanding on techniques of evaluation and use
them for fair assessment and to be equipped with the
skills of handling student problems. 74 participants
from 32 institutions situated in 8 different states of the
country. 70 samples were taken for this study.
2 OBJECTIVES
To find out the significant difference between pre-test
and post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program.
To find out the significant difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of participants below 35
years of age of the faculty development program.
To find out the significant difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of participants above 35 years
of age of the faculty development program.
To find out the significant difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of participants of arts in the
faculty development program.
Jasmine, J. and Mandal, R.
Effectiveness of Faculty Development Programme for the Young Faculty of Universities and Colleges.
DOI: 10.5220/0012533700003792
Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)
In Proceedings of the 1st Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies (PAMIR 2023), pages 981-987
ISBN: 978-989-758-687-3
Proceedings Copyright © 2024 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda.
981

To find out the significant difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of participants of science in
the faculty development program.
To find out the significant difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of government-aided college
participants in the faculty development program.
To find out the significant difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of Private college participants
in the faculty development program.
To find out the significant difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of Women’s college
participants in the faculty development program.
To find out the significant difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of Co-Education college
participants in the faculty development program.
To find out the significant difference between
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on age.
To find out the significant difference between
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on department.
To find out the significant difference between
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on type of management.
To find out the significant difference between
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on gender type of
institution.
3 HYPOTHESES
There is no significant difference between the pre-test
and post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program.
There is no significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of participants below 35
years of age in the faculty development program.
There is no significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of participants above 35 years
of age in the faculty development program.
There is no significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of participants of arts in the
faculty development program.
There is no significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of participants of science in
the faculty development program.
There is no significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of government-aided college
participants in the faculty development program.
There is no significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of private college participants
in the faculty development program.
There is no significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of Co-Education college
participants in the faculty development program.
There is no significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of Women’s college
participants in the faculty development program.
There is no significant difference between the
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on Age.
There is no significant difference between the
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on Department.
There is no significant difference between the
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on Type of management.
There is no significant difference between the
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on Gender type of
institution.
4 METHODOLOGY
Sample:70 participants from 32 institutions situated
in different states of the country and from Sri Lanka.
Designing and Development of Training
Programme on Teaching Skills for Whole Person
Education
The curriculum for the virtual faculty
development program on “Teaching learning
process” was developed by the faculty of St.
Christopher’s College of Education. It has the
following steps:
Demonstration of using various teaching skills
with the necessary explanation.
Hands-on training for the participants to write
learning objectives, apply various teaching skills and
prepare teaching portfolios.
Designing teaching-learning process using
Backward Design and Universal Design for learning.
Applying different active learning methods.
Framing test items which help in testing learning
outcomes.
Doing tasks and assignments for hands-on
experience to write learning objectives, apply various
teaching skills and prepare a teaching portfolio.
Writing teaching philosophy
Identifying student problems and suggesting
suitable solutions.
Justifying the role of research in the professional
development of teachers.
Recalling different ways of managing student
emotions.
PAMIR 2023 - The First Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR
982

Table 1: Schedule.
Date / Time 08.45 - 09.00
Session 1
10.30 -
11.00
Session 2
12.30-
01.30
Session 3 Session 4 Session 5
09.00 -10.30 11.00 - 12.30 01.30-02.45
02.45 -
04.00
4.00-5.00
DAY 1
11.04.2023 Registration
Inauguration
& Orientation
COFFEE
BREAK
Understanding
Self
Dr. Jemmy
LUNCH BREAK
Learning
Outcomes
Mrs. Jasmine J
Active
Learning
Techniques
Dr. Nithila
Coffee with
Mentor
(Reflection)
DAY 2
12.04.2023
DEVOTION
Universal
Design for
Learning
Dr. Riddhi
Assessment &
Feedback
Mrs. Jasmine J
Understanding
Gen Z
Dr. Zarina
Teaching
Philosophy
Dr. Varbi &
Dr. Riddhi
Coffee with
Mentor
(Reflection)
DAY 3
13.04.2023
Human
Relations
Dr. Spurgeon
Teaching
Portfolio
Dr. Hope
Teaching Skills
Dr. Nithila
Backward
Design
Dr. Varbi
Coffee with
Mentor
(Reflection)
DAY 4
14.04.2023
Micro -
Teaching
Micro-
Teaching
Micro-
Teaching
Academic
Research
Dr. Wilson
Coffee with
Mentor
(Reflection)
DAY 5
15.04.2023
Presentation
of Teaching
Portfolio
Presentation of
Teaching
Portfolio
Digital Ethics
Mr. Kevin
Henderson
Feedback &
Valedictory
Tea and
Departure
Resource Person’s feedback on the assignments
submitted by the participants.
5 COURSE CONTENT
Active Learning Techniques, Assessment &
Feedback, Backward Design, Human Relations,
Learning Outcomes, Managing Emotions, Teaching
Philosophy, Teaching Portfolio, Teaching Skills,
Understanding Gen Z, Understanding Self and
Universal Design.
5.1 Designing the Test
Multiple Choice Questions with four alternative
answers with only one correct answer were
constructed. 100 multiple-choice questions were
prepared from the said topic. They were refined based
on the diligent discussions that were made with
subject experts. 45 MCQ were finalized to evaluate
the previous knowledge of participants on the
‘Teaching learning Process’. The same test was used
to test the knowledge of the participants at the end of
the program also.
5.2 Method
One - One-group pre-test - post-test design was
adopted for this research.
Implementation of the faculty development
program on "Teaching Skills for Whole Person
Education":
The Faculty Development Programme has been
scheduled exclusively for young faculty of Colleges
and Universities from 11.04.2023 – 15.04.2023 at
09.00 am - 5.00 pm.
The participants were more in number; it was
decided to divide them into two groups and conduct
parallel sessions. Each day of the first four days ended
with a session called Coffee with Mentor, during
which the participants were divided into four different
groups. The group members had coffee with their
mentor from 4 pm to 5 p.m. During this session, the
participants were encouraged to reflect on the
sessions of that day and were free to express their
thoughts or views regarding the sessions. The mentor
helped the mentees to clarify their doubts regarding
the activities given during the sessions. The session
was enlightening and helped the participants to do
their work related to different sessions easily and
connect it with their Teaching Portfolio. The mentors
facilitated them to prepare their Teaching Philosophy
and teaching portfolio.
Statistical Tests:
Mean, Standard Deviation, Independent t-test,
and Paired sample t-test.
Effectiveness of Faculty Development Programme for the Young Faculty of Universities and Colleges
983

6 DATA ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION
Ho 1: There is no significant difference between the
pre-test and post-test scores of the participants of the
faculty development program.
Table 2: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of the participants.
Variable N Mean Std. Dev. t-value
p-
value
Pre-test 70 25.47 4.954
15.039 0.000
Post-
test
70 33.64 5.956
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (.000 <
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is a significant
difference between the pre-test and post-test scores of
the participants of the
faculty development program.
Hence the null hypothesis is rejected. Post-test mean
scores of the participants of the faculty development
program are higher than that of the Pre-test mean
scores of the participants.
Ho 2: There is no significant difference between the
pre-test and post-test scores of participants below 35
years of age of the faculty development program.
Table 3: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-test
and post-test scores of participants below 35 years of age.
Below 40 years of
Age
N Mean
Std.
Dev.
t -
Value
p
Value
Pre-test 33 26.88 4.622
9.316 0.000
Post - Test 33 34.18 6.262
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.000 <
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is a significant
difference between pre-test and post-test scores of
participants below 35 years of age in the faculty
development program. Hence the null hypothesis is
rejected. Post-test mean scores of the participants
below 35 years of age in the faculty development
program is higher than that of the Pre-test.
Ho 3: There is no significant difference between the
pre-test and post-test scores of participants above 35
years of age of the virtual faculty development
program.
Table 4: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-test
and post-test scores of participants above 35 years of age.
Abov
e 35
years
of age
N
Mea
n
Std.
Dev.
t -
Value
p - Value
Pre-
test
3
7
24.2
2
4.96
2
12.085 0.000
Post -
Test
3
7
33.1
6
5.71
3
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.000 <
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is a significant
difference between pre-test and post-test scores of
participants above 35 years of age in the faculty
development program. Hence the null hypothesis is
rejected. Post-test mean scores of the participants
above 35 years of age in the faculty development
program are higher than that of the Pre-test.
Ho 4: There is no significant difference between the
pre-test and post-test scores of participants of arts in
the faculty development program.
Table 5: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-test
and post-test scores of participants of arts.
Arts N Mean Std. Dev. t - Value p - Value
Pre-test 38 26.11 4.958
10.377 0.000
Post -
Test
38 33.39 5.884
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.000 <
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is a significant
difference between pre-test and post-test scores of
participants of arts in the faculty development
program. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected. post-
test scores of participants of arts in the faculty
development program is higher than that of the Pre-
test.
Ho 5: There is no significant difference between the
pre-test and post-test scores of participants of science
in the faculty development program.
Table 6: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-test
and post-test scores of participants of science.
Science N Mean Std. Dev. t - Value p - Value
Pre-test 32 24.72 4.920
11.239 0.000
Post -
Test
32 33.94 6.122
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.000 <
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is a significant
difference between pre-test and post-test scores of
PAMIR 2023 - The First Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR
984

participants of science in the faculty development
program. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected. Post-
test scores of participants of science in the faculty
development program is higher than that of Pre-test.
Ho 6: There is no significant difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of government-aid college
participants in the faculty development program.
Table 7: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-test
and post-test scores of Government Aided college
participants.
Govt. Aided N Mean Std. Dev. t - Value p - Value
Pre-test 42 24.67 4.647
13.824 0.000
Post - Test 42 33.88 5.819
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.000 <
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is a significant
difference between pre-test and post-test scores of
Government Aided college participants in the faculty
development program. Hence the null hypothesis is
rejected. Post-test scores of government-aided
college participants in the faculty development
program is higher than those of Pre-test.
Ho 7: There is no significant difference between the
pre-test and post-test scores of Private college
participants in the faculty development program.
Table 8: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-test
and post-test scores of Private college participants
Private N Mean Std. Dev. t - Value p - Value
Pre-test 28 26.68 5.236
7.770 0.000
Post - Test 28 33.29 6.247
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.000 <
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is a significant
difference between pre-test and post-test scores of
Private college participants in the faculty
development program. Hence the null hypothesis is
rejected. Post-test scores of Private college
participants in the faculty development program is
higher than that of Pre -test.
Ho 8: There is no significant difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of Co - Education college
participants in the faculty development program.
Table 9: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-test
and post-test scores of Co-Education college participants.
Co - Ed. N Mean Std. Dev. t - Value p - Value
Pre-test 29 26.34 4.245
9.557 0.000
Post - Test 29 35.45 5.761
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.000 <
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is a significant
difference between pre-test and post-test scores of
Co-Education college participants in the faculty
development program. Hence the null hypothesis is
rejected. Post-test scores of Co-Education college
participants in the faculty development program is
higher than that of the Pre-test.
Ho 9: There is no significant difference between the
pre-test and post-test scores of Women’s college
participants in the faculty development program.
Table 10: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of Women’s college participants.
Women’s
College
N Mean
Std.
Dev.
t -
Value
p -
Value
Pre-test 41 24.85 5.36
11.967 0.000
Post - Test 41 32.37 5.83
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.000 <
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is a significant
difference between pre-test and post-test scores of
Women’s college participants in the faculty
development program. Hence the null hypothesis is
rejected. Post-test scores of Women’s college
participants in the faculty development program is
higher than that of Pre -test.
Ho 10: There is no significant difference between
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on Age.
Table 11: ‘t’ – test to find out difference between pre-test
and post-test scores of Participants based on Age
Age N Mean Std. Dev. t - Value p - Value
Below 35 33 34.18 6.262
0.709 0.481
Above 35 37 33.16 5.713
Interpretation: In the above table p value (0.481>
.05) is greater than .05, therefore there is no
significant difference between post-test scores of the
Effectiveness of Faculty Development Programme for the Young Faculty of Universities and Colleges
985

participants of the faculty development program
based on age. Hence the null hypothesis is accepted.
Ho 11: There is no significant difference between
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on Department.
Table 12: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of Participants based on
Department.
Department N Mean Std. Dev. t - Value p - Value
Arts 38 33.39 5.884
0.377 0.708
Science 32 33.94 6.122
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.708 >
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is no significant
difference between the post-test scores of the
participants of the faculty development program
based on Department. Hence the null hypothesis is
accepted.
Ho 12: There is no significant difference between the
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on the Type of
Management.
Table 13: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of Participants based on Type of
Management.
Type of
Management
N Mean
Std.
Dev.
t -
Value
p -
Value
Govt. Aided 42 33.88 5.819
0.401 0.690
Private 28 33.29 6.247
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.690 >
.05) is greater than .05, therefore there is no
significant difference between the post-test scores of
the participants of the faculty development program
based on Type of Management. Hence the null
hypothesis is accepted.
Ho 13: There is no significant difference between the
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on Gender type of
institution.
Table 14: ‘t’ – test to find out the difference between pre-
test and post-test scores of Participants based on Gender
type of institution.
Gender
Type of
Institution
N Mean
Std.
Dev.
t -
Value
p -
Value
Co-Ed. 29 35.45 5.761
2.195 0.032
Women’s 41 32.37 5.826
Interpretation: In the above table p-value (0.032 <
.05) is less than .05, therefore there is a significant
difference between the post-test scores of the
participants of the faculty development program
based on Gender type of institutions. Hence the null
hypothesis is rejected. Post–test scores of Co-Ed.
College participants are higher than that of Women’s
College participants.
7 MAJOR FINDINGS
There is a significant difference between the pre-test
and post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program. Post-test mean scores of the
participants of the faculty development program is
higher than that of Pre–test mean scores of the
participants.
There is a significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of participants below 35
years of age in the faculty development program.
Post-test scores of participants below 35 years of age
in the faculty development program are higher than
that of pre-test scores.
There is a significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of above 35 years of age
participants in the faculty development program.
Post-test scores of the participants above 35 years of
age in the faculty development program is higher than
that of pre-test scores.
There is a significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of participants of arts in the
faculty development program. Post-test scores of the
participants of arts in the faculty development
program are higher than those of pre-test scores.
There is a significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of participants of science in
the faculty development program. Post-test scores of
the participants of science in the faculty development
program is higher than that of pre-test scores
There is a significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of Government Aided
College participants in the faculty development
program. Post-test scores of government-aided
PAMIR 2023 - The First Pamir Transboundary Conference for Sustainable Societies- | PAMIR
986

college participants in the faculty development
program is higher than those of Pre-test.
There is no significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of Private college participants
in the faculty development program. Post-test scores
of the Private college participants in the faculty
development program are higher than that of pre-test
scores
There is a significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of Co-Education college
participants in the faculty development program.
Post-test scores of the Co-Education college
participants in the faculty development program are
higher than that of pre-test scores
There is a significant difference between the pre-
test and post-test scores of Women’s college
participants in the faculty development program.
Post-test scores of Women’s college participants in
the faculty development program are higher than that
of pre-test scores.
There is no significant difference between post-
test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on age
There is no significant difference between the
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on Department.
There is no significant difference between the
post-test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on Type of
Management.
There is a significant difference between the post-
test scores of the participants of the faculty
development program based on Gender type of
institutions. Post–test scores of Co-Ed. College
participants are higher than that of Women’s College
participants.
8 CONCLUSION
The findings revealed that the faculty development
program on the teaching-learning process was
effective. It has widened the understanding of young
faculty of Colleges and Universities to use different
teaching and evaluation methods, use different
classroom management approaches and to conduct
research using scientific methods.
REFERENCES
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., &
Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational
objectives: The classification of educational goals. New
York, NY: David McKay.
Brown, A. H., & Green, T. D. (2015). The essentials of
instructional design: Connecting fundamental
principles with process and practice. Routledge.
McIver, D., Fitzsimmons, S., & Flanagan, D. (2016). A
Knowledge-in-practice approach to choosing
instructional methods. Journal of Management
Education, 40(1).
Nilson, L. (2016). Teaching at its best: A research-based
resource for college instructors. Jossey-Bass.
Effectiveness of Faculty Development Programme for the Young Faculty of Universities and Colleges
987