University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Community college faculty member perspectives of workforce development-oriented public-private partnerships

(USC Thesis Other)

Community college faculty member perspectives of workforce development-oriented public-private partnerships

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Community College Faculty Member Perspectives of Workforce Development-Oriented PublicPrivate Partnerships
by
Salvatrice Cummo
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
Copyright 2024 Salvatrice Cummo
August 2024

2
Table of Contents
List of Tables v
List of Figures vi
Abstract vii
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 1
Context of the Study 2
Background of the Problem 2
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions 4
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology 6
Definitions 7
Public-Private Partnerships 7
Workforce Development 7
Community College 8
Faculty Member 8
Organization of the Dissertation 8
CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 10
Community Colleges 10
Typical Community College Student Population 11
Community College Mission, Impacts, and Contributions 13
Features and Dynamics of Community Colleges 15
Advantages and Opportunities of Community Colleges 16
Weaknesses and Liabilities of Community Colleges 17
Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges 18
Purpose of Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges 23
Impacts, Contributions, and Success Rates of Public-Private Partnerships with
Community Colleges 24
Frameworks and Processes of Public-Private Partnerships with Community
Colleges 27
Formative Stage of Public-Private Partnerships with Community
Colleges 29
Happenstance 29
The Deliberate Process 30
Generating Value 31
Operational Stage of Public-Private Partnerships with Community
Colleges 32
Managing Relationships 32
The Role of Leadership 33
Sustaining the Alliance Through Communication 34
Evaluation Stage of Public-Private Partnerships with Community
Colleges 36
Success Factors of Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges 37
Obstacles and Threats of Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges 37

3
Workforce Development and Readiness 38
The Need for Workforce Development 41
Globalization as a Driver of Workforce Development Programs 42
Technology as a Driver of Workforce Development Programs 43
New Economy as a Driver of Workforce Development Programs 44
Political Change as a Driver of Workforce Development Programs 45
Demographic Shifts as a Driver of Workforce Development Programs 46
History of Workforce Development Programs 47
Community College Involvement in Workforce Readiness 50
Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges and Workforce
Readiness 51
Community Collg Faculty Mmbrs’ Rol in Workforc
Development-Oriented Public-Private Partnerships 55
Career and Technical Education 58
Conceptual Framework 59
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY 63
Research Questions 63
Overview of Design 63
Positionality 66
Data Sources 68
Participants 69
Sample Size 70
Selection Criteria 70
Sampling Strategy 71
Selection Procedures 72
Instrumentation 73
Data Collection Procedures 74
Data Analysis Procedures 74
Credibility and Trustworthiness 76
Ethics 77
Limitations and Delimitations 78
Summary 80
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS 81
Research Questions 81
Participant Demographics 81
Research Question 1: What Are Faculty Perspectives Regarding Their Participation in
Workforce Development-Oriented PPPs Relative to Their Role and Contract
Within the College? 82
Faculty Perceive that PPPs Involve Arranging Student Experiential Learning 82
Faculty Perceive that PPPs Involve Collaborating with Other Industry Players 84
Few Faculty Perceive that PPPs Involve Training the existing workforce in the
local community’ Comptncis 85
Faculty Prciv that Workforc Dvlopmnt is Outsid Faculty Mmbrs’
Role 85

4
Research Question 2: What Motivates Faculty Members to Participate in Workforce
Development-Oriented PPPs? 86
Faculty Dsir to Support Studnts’ Long-Term Success 86
Faculty Gain Intrinsic Fulfillment and Satisfaction from Participating in PPPs 88
Faculty Experience Departmental Pressure to Participate in PPPs 90
Faculty Have Interest in Gaining Closer Ties with Industry by Participating
PPPs 91
Faculty Participation in PPPs is Necessary for Obtaining Funding 92
Research Question 3: What Factors Demotivate or Obstruct Faculty Members from
Participating in Workforce Development-Oriented PPPs? 93
Faculty Perceive Few Benefits for Participation 93
Faculty Have Limited Time and Bandwidth to Participate in PPPs 94
Faculty Receive Limited Structure, Accountability, and Resources to
Participate in PPPs 95
Faculty Lack of Industry Connections to Support Their Participation in PPPs 97
Faculty Have Varying Degrees of Knowhow to Participate in PPPs 98
Summary 98
CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 101
Discussion of Findings 101
Faculty Perspectives Regarding Involvement in Participation in Workforce
Development-Oriented Partnerships 101
Faculty Motivation to Participate in Workforce Development-Oriented
Partnerships 105
Factors That Demotivate Faculty Participation in Workforce DevelopmentOriented Partnerships 106
Connection to Past Literature 109
Implications 111
Recommendations for Practice 113
Limitations and Delimitations 116
Recommendations for Future Research 118
Conclusion 120
REFERENCES 122
APPENDIX A: STUDY INVITATION 138
APPENDIX B: INFORMED CONSENT FORM 139
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL 141
APPENDIX D: ALIGNMENT OF INTERVIEW QUESTIONS, RESEARCH
QUESTIONS, AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 144

5
List of Tables
Table 1 Comparative Analysis of Workforce Development Programs Across Types of Higher
Education Institutions 49
Table 2 Types of Case Study Designs 66
Table 3 Participants 82

6
List of Figures
Figure 1 Conceptual Framework 60

7
Abstract
This exploratory qualitative case study examined community college faculty perspectives
regarding participating in workforce development-oriented private-public partnerships (PPPs).
Nine faculty members who teach career and technical education at the study setting were
recruited and interviewed to gain their perceptions relative to participating in PPPs. The data
were examined using thematic analysis. All nine participants believed that workforcedevelopment PPPs concern arranging student internships and work experience. All nine
participants stated that their motivation rests in the intrinsic sense of fulfillment and satisfaction
they gain from helping students and from their belief that gaining practical work experience is
cntral to studnt ducation and nhancs studnts’ long-term success. Participants reported that
the primary obstacle to their involvement was the lack of benefits for participating and lack of
consequences for neglecting to participate in workforce development. Lack of time, bandwidth,
structure, accountability, and resources additionally undermined their participation. Based on
ths findings, community collg administrators ar advisd to (a) incras faculty mmbrs’
awarnss that thy ar public srvants, (b) draw xplicit connctions btwn faculty mmbrs’
natural motivations and the benefits they could gain from participating in PPPs, and instituting
project management frameworks and personnel to create structure and accountability around
faculty mmbrs’ involvmnt. Additional rsarch is advisd to xamin and incras faculty
mmbrs’ understanding of their role as public servants, examine successful case studies of
community college faculty member involvement in workforce development to uncover helpful
strategies, and explore supportive structure and accountability systems other colleges use to
engage faculty members in workforce development.

1
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
A sizable proportion of individuals enroll in community colleges to ultimately enter the
workforce and earn a livable wage (Bahr et al., 2022; Hoachlander et al., 2003; Latiolais & Hu,
2022); however, studies indicate that workforce preparation programs fail to accomplish this
goal (Bahr et al., 2022). The lack of parallel growth between community college matriculation
and graduates attaining a livable wage suggests that poor alignment may exist between employer
nds and community collg graduats’ qualifications. Stvns t al. (2018) found in thir study
of labor market outcomes among California community college graduates that the career and
technical education (CTE) programs yield widely varying earnings outcomes, with some
graduates faring no better than high school graduates while others did increase their earnings and
earning potential. If community colleges fail to deliver on the potential for improved earnings
and job prospects for students and fail to produce graduates that meet industry needs, these
institutions may have limited (and decreasing) value for the students and employers they are
intended to serve.
This trend is particularly problematic, given that community colleges primarily serve
individuals who are older, economically disadvantaged, and from underserved communities
(Latiolais & Hu, 2022; National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2022b). Failing to equip
these individuals for the workforce only intensifies the economic and career challenges they face.
If this trend continues, survival of the community colleges themselves also may be at risk, which
may further exacerbate the educational and economic disparities for the populations these
institutions serve. Analysis by the Hechinger Report (Butrymowicz & D'Amato, 2020) found
that during the pandemic, more than 500 colleges and universities across the U.S. showed
warning signs of financial stress and risk of closure. Nearly 1,400 colleges and universities

2
reported steady declines in first-year enrollment since 2009, and roughly 700 public institutions
received less in state and local appropriations in the 2017-2018 school year than in 2009-2010.
Creating better alignment between community college curricula and local employer needs may
enable community colleges to equip graduates with the competencies they need to secure gainful
employment following graduation. However, a framework has been lacking for creating such
alignment.
Context of the Study
The study setting was one community college located in the Western U.S. that enrolls
more than 20,000 students each semester across its degrees, transfer programs, and certificates.
Nearly half the student body identifies as Latinx and one quarter of students are of Asian
descent. The institution offers 10 areas of study in CTE ranging from Automotive Technology to
Computrs and nrolls narly 6,000 studnts. Th institution’s Offic of Work Engagmnt
annually delivers 20 workshops and events, has facilitated the completion of more than 200
student appointments and placed more than 1,000 students across more than 100 internship
programs. Over 500 partnerships with private business entities (termed public-private
partnership [PPP; Mihaelaa et al., 2015]) are completed each year, generating over 7,000 student
jobs, work-based learning opportunities, and course-based student engagement opportunities,
culminating in $1 million in revenue for the college. These activities external to the institution
result in more than 150 trainings for employers and more than 200 employees being trained
annually.
Background of the Problem
A 2020 report by Boston Consulting Group detailed a rapidly growing skills mismatch
across the globe and estimates that 1.3 billion people have competencies misaligned with the

3
work they perform—including 53.3 million in the U.S. (Puckett & Hoteit, 2020). The research
reveals that higher education institutions have a tremendous opportunity to step up and help
reduce the mismatch. They can do so by initiating deep collaboration with employers in their
region to equip the workforce with up to date, in-demand competencies. Businesses, in turn,
should support this collaboration by investing in their people and working with higher education
institutions to offer upskilling and reskilling opportunities along a lifelong learning path.
Community colleges, compared to other institutions of higher education, are uniquely
positioned to address mismatches between workforce skills and employer needs (Bahr et al.,
2022; Hoachlander et al., 2003; Latiolais & Hu, 2022). According to the Aspen Institute
Workforce playbook, community colleges simultaneously drive talent development for
employers and economic mobility for the 8.7 million students they educate each year, which
accounts for 34% of all U.S. undergraduates. These institutions are especially important for
college students of color, about half of whom start their postsecondary education at community
colleges, and low-income college students, 44% of whom start at community colleges (NCES,
2022b). Faculty members are the main drivers to preparing students for the future of work. In
Fall 2019, approximately 92,500 faculty, staff, and administrators worked across the system.
Among all employees, 46% were temporary academic faculty, 20% were tenured/tenure track
faculty, 32% were classified staff, and 3% were educational administrators (California
Community Collgs Chancllor’s Offic, 2022a).
Amrica’s stat univrsitis provid quality ducation at a far lower cost than private
institutions, while collaboration with key corporate partners allows them to focus their efforts on
programs with th gratst rgional impact (Sha, 2022). Th contnt of today’s univrsity
coursework and programs is designed to align with what is needed in the workforce. Several

4
studies have identified partnerships between the academic institutions and the business
environment as a core key performance indicator for assessing efficiency and accountability
within higher education (Mihaelaa et al., 2015). Such partnerships are described as workforce
development-oriented public-private partnerships (PPPs). However, these partnerships often fail
to accomplish their goals (Brown, 2018; McLaughlin et al., 2017). There are a variety of ways
community colleges can and do collaborate with employers to ensure their education and training
programs align with industry needs and that their graduates are qualified for local jobs.
Employers can offer guidance on the curriculum, skills, and competencies that should be the
focus of training and credentialing. They may serve on advisory boards or coordinate with other
employers as part of industry partnerships. They can provide valuable resources such as their
own employees as instructors, equipment and facilities for training, and work-based learning
opportunities. Moreover, employers can refer their own workers to college programs to upgrade
thir skills (Scott t al., 2018). Although Scott t al.’s (2018) rsarch dscribs th qualitis of
strong employer-community college partnerships and draws insights from the employers that
partner with colleges, insight has been lacking on from the college partners about how to engage
faculty in these partnerships in an effective and efficient way. Contributing to this gap in the
research was a focus of the present study.
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purpose of this study was to examine community college faculty perspectives
regarding participating in workforce development-oriented public-private partnerships (PPPs).
Three questions were examined:
1. What are faculty perspectives regarding their participation in workforce developmentoriented PPPs relative to their role and contract within the college?

5
2. What motivates faculty members to participate in workforce development-oriented PPPs?
3. What factors demotivate or obstruct faculty members from participating in workforce
development-oriented PPPs?
Importance of the Study
The partnership between faculty teaching career technical education programs and
industries, known as Public Private Partnership (PPP), plays an important role to overcome the
skill gaps requirement between career technical education graduates and industries. According to
Kiskr and Carducci (2003), “if community collgs ar to preserve their role in training the
nation's high-tech workforce, they must continue to offer cutting-edge curricula that prepare
studnts to mt th tchnological dmand” (p. 53). Thr ar many studis dmonstrating th
benefits to the community college partnerships with the private sector; however, there are also
several challenges inherent in the process of creating them.
This study seeks to examine faculty perspectives about participating in workforce
development-oriented public-private partnerships - in particular, how they view PPPs in relation
to their role as faculty and how faculty contracts determine their level of engagement. The
incentives, motivators, and obstacles that affect their involvement also were examined.
Resistance to change among many faculty makes private sector partnerships challenging.
According to Kisker and Carducci (2003), even though community college presidents frequently
feel compelled to pursue partnerships with local businesses because they represent an alternative
source of revenue, many faculty are less enthusiastic about these relationships, as they often
require modifying traditional or unique academic courses in order to meet industry needs (Hanks
& Williamson, 2002). In addition, some faculty view vocational or workforce training as an
unwelcome intrusion into an educational institution whose focus should remain on the liberal arts

6
or transfer functions (Dougherty & Bakia,1999). Lastly, college union rules governing course
loads and teaching schedules can make it difficult for full-time faculty to participate in
partnerships with the private sector (Dougherty & Bakia, 1999).
An in-depth look of this study aided in shaping future PPP models, build capacity for this
work and allocate accurate resources. A critical look at the identification of shared organizational
missions and goals necessitates that community college leaders and their business counterparts
engage in frequent and candid conversations concerning their respective organizational and
community visions (Kisker & Carducci, 2003). PPPs typically are revenue generators for
community colleges; therefore, more understanding was needed about the viewpoints of all
participants, especially those of the faculty who play a central role in these endeavors. Attention
also should be given to the governance and accountability of these projects, particularly as it
concerns hiring practices, staffing matters, compensation, and the day-to-day operations of
project facilities, as past research has identified these aspects as significant sources of tension
between partners (Buettner, Morrison, & Wasicek, 2002; Irlen & Gulluni, 2002; Regional
Technology Strategies, Inc., 2001b; Sundberg, 2002).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The theoretical framework guiding the prsnt study was comprisd of Vroom’s (1964)
expectancy theory and the theory of extra-role behavior (Van Dyne et al., 1995). Vroom (1964)
asserted that employee behavior results from their conscious choices, whereas Van Dyne et al.
(1995) defined an extra-rol bhavior as an action whos aim is to “bnfit th organization and
that goes beyond existing role expectations" (Organ et al., 2006, p. 33).
Expectancy theory and the theory of extra-role behavior create an appropriate lens for
examining faculty mmbrs’ prcptions of involvmnt in workforc dvlopmnt-oriented

7
PPPs for several reasons. Faculty member involvement in workforce development oriented PPPs
may b incrasd by xamining participants’ viws of whthr thy bliv ths activitis fall
inside or outside their role and what would motivate them to take part.
This study used an exploratory qualitative case study (Yin, 2017) based on interviews
with 10 career and technical education faculty members recruited from the study setting.
Definitions
Several terms are associated with core concepts in this dissertation. The following
sections describe each term.
Public-Private Partnerships
A PPP is a long-term contract between a private party and a government entity, for
providing a public asset or service, in which the private party bears significant risk and
management responsibility, and remuneration is linked to performance (World Bank Group,
2022). PPPs with community colleges feature the creation and delivery of accredited curricula
where lessons learned in a classroom setting are designed to translate to the field practicum
setting of local agencies. To achieve this outcome, expertise from academics are blended with
that of experienced working professionals within the community (Rubin & Kilgore, 2020).
Workforce Development
Workforce development refers to local, national, and international policies and programs
focused on aiding workers in learning knowledge and skills for work (Jacobs & Hawley, 2009).
Various stakeholders are involved in this process, including secondary vocational education
programs, welfare-to-work and other public assistance programs, and regional economic
development initiatives, youth vocational training, adult training and retraining, and related
employment initiatives.

8
Community College
A community college, also referred to as a junior college, is a 2-year institution that
provides comparatively inexpensive postsecondary education as a pathway to a 4-year degree.
Community colleges are publicly funded institutions of higher education that offer academic,
developmental, and occupational programs (Soares, 2010) and are designed to serve the local
economy (Beach, 2011; Cohen et al., 2014).
Faculty Member
A faculty member is an educator who works at a college or university and whose
responsibilities are defined by a formal employment contract. A faculty member may work parttime or full-time.
Organization of the Dissertation
The present chapter introduced the study, including a discussion of the context and
background of the problem, project purpose and research questions, importance of the study,
theoretical framework and methodology, and definitions. Chapter 2 provides a review of
literature to support the present study, including a discussion of community colleges and PPPs,
theory and research related to workforce development, and a synthesis of the literature and
presentation of a conceptual framework. Chapter 3 describes the research methods that were used
to conduct the present study, including a reiteration of the research questions, overview of the
design, and description of the research setting. My positionality as the researcher also is
acknowledged. The data sources for this study are outlined, and the procedures related to
participant recruitment, instrumentation, and data collection and analysis are described.
Approachs to improv th study’s crdibility and trustworthinss ar rviwd and th

9
procdurs to uphold th thics of rsarch wr idntifid. Th study’s limitations and
delimitations also are acknowledged.

10
Chapter Two: Literature Review
This chapter examines literature relevant to the present study. A discussion of community
colleges is presented first, followed by a discussion of public-private partnerships. Theory and
research related to workforce development are then reviewed. The chapter closes with a
synthesis of the literature and presentation of a conceptual framework.
Community Colleges
A community college, also referred to as a junior college, is a 2-year institution that
provides comparatively inexpensive postsecondary education as a pathway to a 4-year degree.
Community colleges are publicly funded institutions of higher education that offer academic,
developmental, and occupational programs (Soares, 2010) and are designed to serve the local
economy (Beach, 2011; Cohen et al., 2014). Community colleges offer three types of programs:
1. Developmental programs, also known as pre-college instruction, are designed to raise
the students skills up to college standards, before entering their first college-level
course (Bailey & Cho, 2010).
2. Academic programs are a combination of courses that lead to a certificate or
associates degree, achieving specific learning outcomes.
3. Occupational programs, also known as career technical education programs (CTE),
prepare students for an occupation that requires a specialized skill, combining both
classroom instruction and hands-on training.
As of 2022, there were a total of 1,043 community colleges in the U.S., of which 936
were public, 35 were tribal affiliated, and 72 were independent (American Association of
Community Colleges, 2022). Together, these institutions awarded 599,397 certificates, 21,348
baccalaureate degrees, and 865,504 associate degrees for the 2019-2020 school year.

11
Typical Community College Student Population
In Fall 2020, 6.2 million students enrolled in community colleges for credit and 4.1
million students enrolled in noncredit programs. Of these, 40% were male and 60% were female
(American Association of Community Colleges, 2022). Community colleges serve a majority of
nontraditional students who often face economic and other barriers to pursuing higher education
(Sublett et al., 2021). According to NCES (2022b), only 35% of enrolled students attended fulltime, indicating they had other commitments and responsibilities outside of academics.
Moreover, 62% of all full-time students in community college work full-time (21%) or part-time
(41%), according to NCES (2018).
Community colleges also disproportionately serve students of color (e.g., more than half
the students enrolled for credit were Hispanic (27%), Black (12%), Asian/Pacific Islander (7%),
Two or more races (4%), or Native American (1%), according to statistics by NCES (2022b).
Furthermore, 29% of community college students are the first generation in their families to
attend college, while 20% are students with disabilities, 15% are single parents, 8% are non-U.S.
citizens, 4% are veterans (NCES, 2018, 2022a). Community college students also tend to be
older than students at traditional 4-year institutions, with an average age of 27 years and 42% of
the student body being 22 years or older (NCES 2021, 2022a). Community colleges may be
particularly effective in attracting an economically diverse student body due to their very low
cost compared to other institutions (American Association of Community Colleges, 2022;
Bumpus, 2018).
Within California, 2.1 million students enrolled at 116 colleges in the 2019-2020 school
year, making California Community Colleges system the largest system of higher education in
th country (California Community Collgs Chancllor’s Offic, 2022b). Morovr, 29% of

12
University of California and 51% of California State University graduates started at a California
community college. Most California community college students (71%) are people of diverse
ethnic backgrounds.
Across the U.S., the COVID-19 pandemic has led to a dramatic decline in full-time
student enrollment at community colleges, with Spring 2022 enrollment falling 20.9% lower than
that of Spring 2020 (National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, 2022). Part-time student
enrollment also has declined, yielding a total drop in community college enrollment of 16.6%
(827,113 students). Although enrollment has declined by nearly 1.4 million students across all
higher education institutions since the pandemic, community colleges account for 59.5% of the
enrollment losses. Furthermore, these recent declines in community college enrollment only
accelerated an already problematic trend that began in 2010 following the Great Recession
(Juszkiewicz, 2017). Even more concerning, the enrollment declines appear to be
disproportionately affecting populations underrepresented in higher education. For example,
enrollment of Black first-year community college students dropped 5.8%, women dropped 9.2%
(compared to 5.6% drop in men), and students over age 24 across all higher education
institutions dropped 5.8% (National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, 2022).
To combat the declines, community colleges reportedly are implementing various
strategies, such as improving outreach efforts to students who have dropped out and increasing
advertising and marketing (Leckrone, 2022). Notably, career and technical education (CTE)
enrollment increased since 2021 (National Student Clearinghouse Research Center, 2022). In
particular, construction enrollment increased 19.3%, while precision and production programs
increased 16.7%, culinary programs increased 12.7%, and mechanic and repair programs
increased 11.5%. Despite these improvements, enrollment in these programs remains below pre-

13
COVID levels. Explanations for the decline in these programs centered on pandemic-related
safety measures and labor demand in these professions (Leckrone, 2022).
Spring 2022 enrollment of first-year students at community colleges increased by 3.1%
compared to Spring 2021. However, this enrollment increase does not compensate for the overall
declines registered since the start of the pandemic. Researchers at the National Student
Clearinghouse Research Center (2022) noted, "This spring's growth was not enough to return
community college freshman enrollment to pre-pandemic levels, with the current freshmen
numbers still running 7.9 percent (17,000 students) below spring 2020's levels," (p. 2).
In summary, community colleges predominantly serve student populations that tend to be
underrepresented and underserved in higher education (American Association of Community
Colleges, 2022). Concerningly, enrollment in community colleges has been steadily declining
since 2010 and dramatically declining since 2020 (Juszkiewicz, 2017; National Student
Clearinghouse Research Center, 2022). These statistics suggest that the unique mission fulfilled
by community colleges may be at risk. This unique mission is discussed in the next section.
Community College Mission, Impacts, and Contributions
Community colleges serve unique needs for the students, employers, and institutions
within their communities. By design, community colleges are local and reflect the needs of the
community in which they reside (Bumphus, 2018). As such, the fundamental mission of a
community college is to support the local economy.
Serving an estimated 12 million for-credit and non-credit students, community colleges
surpass other postsecondary education providers, including 4-year schools and workforce
training programs in terms of access to and cost of their services (Soares, 2010). The
undergraduates who begin their academic journey at community colleges do so for reasons such

14
as affordability, flexible learning options, proximity, and opportunities to explore educational
and career paths (Strikwerda, 2018). Others enroll to gather specific skills, training, and
credentials to position them favorably to compete in the labor market (Sublett et al., 2021).
Community colleges uphold three main ideals as it pertains to its students: open access to
education as evidenced by 95% acceptance rates (Bumphus, 2018); classes tailored to individual
goals; and being pillars in their communities. Focused on accessibility and low cost, community
colleges enable many students to complete their first two years of college without debt and with
a solid academic foundation provided by many of the same professors that teach students in the
university setting. Many of these students also successfully go on to transfer to 4-year
institutions to complt thir bachlors’ dgrs.
Community colleges initially were created as a way to train women to enter the
workforc as tachrs in th arly 1930’s (Bumphus, 2018); in this sns, community colleges
initially began as vocational schools. Community colleges subsequently have built robust
workforce development programs, transforming the trajectory of the students' economic
mobility. Community colleges historically have been uniquely positioned to design, implement,
and manage programs, aligned with labor market data, to equip students with the skills, training,
and credentials needed to compete in the real world of work (Sublett et al., 2021).
Career and technical education or workforce development programs provided by
community colleges are structured to develop needed skills for a diverse, modern workforce
(Bumphus, 2018). The necessity of the evolution of these programs was dictated by the
advancement of technology. Thus, as technology and industries develop and advance, so do the
community college curricula. Often, these programs are the result of partnerships between
industry and the college so that the programs address the regional economic needs of employers

15
and employees. In turn, the programs create a pipeline that serves the community and its citizens
with a viable job market.
Features and Dynamics of Community Colleges
With a primary mission to align students to the workforce demands, community colleges
have a unique approach in responding to the workforce demands, more than other higher
education institutions. Particularly in the design of their career technical educational programs,
alignment of program offerings and workforce demand is driven by local labor market data
(Sublett et al., 2021). The data plays a significant role on how courses are designed, funded, and
implemented. For example, the latest reauthorization of the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical
Education Act, now includes a requirement that eligible agencies complete a Comprehensive
Local Nds Assssmnt vry two yars that, among othr things, vrifis CTE “programs of
study are aligned to and validated by local workforce needs and economic priorities (Advance
CTE, 2019, para. 1). Sublett et al. (2021) argue that other research similarly suggests that
changes in college majors enrollment is tied to changes in the share of local employment in fields
related to that major. Unlike students in other higher education institutions, community college
students pay attention to labor market trends and are less likely to enroll in programs aligned
with industries that are experiencing declines in local employment, such as mass layoffs (Sublett
et al., 2021). Labor market alignment to programs are also seen in the community colleges ability
to build advisory boards for CTE programs. The purpose of the boards is to gather information
from the local employers on skills and certifications they need, employment requirements they
have in place, and the demands industries are projecting locally (Sublett et al., 2021).
Additionally, they develop seamless pathways to employment for students. Other factors that
distinguish community colleges from universities is that community colleges need to observe

16
distinct state mandates governing them and limit their offering to associates-level instruction
versus upper-level and graduate courses (Public Policy Institute of California, 2016).
Advantages and Opportunities of Community Colleges
Historically, since the inception of community colleges in the 1900s, have demonstrated
their ability to shift focus, programming, academic offerings and services, to meet the everchanging needs of the communities they serve. Although a noble characteristic, community
colleges have faced many oppositions to the expansion of the community college baccalaureate
(Wright-Kim, 2022). Research shows community college baccalaureate offers a monumental
opportunity to impact student access, institutional behavior, serve the community needs and meet
existing labor market shortages (Wright-Kim, 2022). A shift in expanding baccalaureate
offerings will take a shift in legislation and community college culture. A culture driven by data
from multiple inputs, has tremendous advantages for community colleges, specifically working
with State partnership to gain access to current, relevant, and detailed labor market information
to understand the demands of the local markets. Similarly, community colleges have an
advantage in gaining access to detailed institutional data such as student program participation,
student outcomes, and achievement by program (Sublett et al., 2021). A shift in the culture poses
additional opportunities in private partner partnerships that can be prioritized by the institution's
leaders. Meeting regularly with partners and listening to the needs of the industry while
simultaneously sharing the strength of their institutions and students (Davidson et al., 2019). This
allows the college to ensure programs provide the students with in-demand skills and credentials,
while the labor market information evaluates and supports market aligned programs (Sublett et
al., 2021). Beyond market alignment, community colleges can create additional cultural shifts by
adopting the concept of aligned thinking. Aligned thinking is a pervasive component and practice

17
of every program of study on a campus, including transfer and other academic programs (Sublett
et al., 2021).
Weaknesses and Liabilities of Community Colleges
Community colleges have a strong, clear mission, however as a public institution there
are some areas of growth. One significant challenge is designing education experiences that are
relatable to the students' life and what they are wanting from a community college education.
Community college students are interested in building their workforce skills that are informed by
the labor market while simultaneously learning the coursework. Studies show, many need some
precollege coursework before beginning any entry level college work (Soares, 2010). As such,
the existing community college instructional models and curricula deliver instruction in narrow
silos and are not built to braid integrated vocational and academic skill development much less
support the complex balance of life, work, and education (Soares, 2010). In general, colleges
traditionally offer academic, occupational, and developmental education programs. Each silo
underscores one of the missions of community colleges: university transfer, vocational and
development education. Historically, each mission has operated as a separate entity within the
community college governance and business models including separate operations, staff, and
funding sources. State and Federal funding are the two main sources of the siloed structure
reinforcing the separation of systems and making it difficult to innovate with the funding
regulation and compliance (Soares, 2010). As a result, community colleges continue to face
long-standing criticism of being slow to respond to changes in demands from the labor market.
Contradicting their long-held mission of preparing students for locally in-demand careers (Fuller
et al., 2014; Holzer, 2015; Meier, 2018). With the combination of limited resources and a slow
response time to labor market demands, workforce preparation programs also struggle to keep up

18
with the rapidly changing technology needs of employers, leading some programs to offer
training in outdated skills, particularly in industries such as STEM (Deming & Noray, 2019). In
addition, colleges struggle to allocate limited resources for CTE programs needing high-cost
equipment and industry relevant technology (Sublett et al., 2021). Lastly, labor market
information is not always easily accessible, nor do community colleges have robust Offices of
Institutional Effectiveness. The Bureau of Labor Statistics makes a range of employment data
available to the public, however locating, analyzing, and interpreting these data is difficult when
most colleges struggle to allocate the appropriate resources and content expertise. Furthermore,
regional labor market information is often not available for colleges in remote rural areas
(Sublett et al., 2021).
Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges
A community college and industry partnership (CCIP), also known as a public-private
partnership (PPP), is a collaboration between a community college and an individual business,
group of firms, chamber of commerce, industry association or sector partnership (Soares, 2010).
Community colleges strive to maintain their relationships with businesses through a variety of
strategies designed to support workforce and economic development (Cohen & Brawer, 2003). A
variety of tools are utilized by colleges to remain attentive to the requirements of their business
partners, including training contracts, partnerships, and strategic alliances (Dougherty & Bakia,
2000). Community colleges are one of the main providers of workforce training for businesses
because of their cost effectiveness, customizable curricula, convenience, and high quality of
instruction (Zeiss, 1997). In a similar vein, community colleges strive to establish relationships
with businesses, which contribute a growing share of revenue to offset the declining funding
received from the federal and state governments. At the beginning of the 1990s, less than half of

19
community colleges worked with businesses to provide training. By the middle of the 1990s,
nearly every college in the nation had joined some kind of partnership to provide training to
employees of businesses (Stamps, 1995; Zeiss, 1997).
Every effort is made by U.S. industries and businesses to not only survive but also thrive:
The objective is to increase profitability and productivity quickly in response to competition in a
global economy (Rivera & Paradise, 2006). The education and training of employees is seen as
an essential strategy by many businesses to boost profits and employee performance. Rivera and
Heaven (2006) elaborated, "Those pioneers who comprehend how to drive business brings about
an undeniably cutthroat, worldwide climate perceive that a superior prepared labor force further
develops execution, and putting resources into representative learning and improvement is basic
to making progress" (p. 4). Business commitments to a competent workforce are demonstrated
by trends in employee training expenditures. In 2006, U.S. businesses and industries spent
$129.60 billion on employee learning and job-performance training (Rivera & Paradise, 2006).
Organizations spent $79.85 billion on training, while more than 38% of the total national
expenditures ($49.75 billion) went toward training suppliers and service providers outside of
business plants. It was clear from these data that U.S. companies wanted to keep their
competitive edge in a global economy and thought investing in human capital was a viable
mechanism for doing so.
Community colleges responded to business and industry needs early in the history of the
system with this proclamation issued during one of the first board meetings for the American
Association of Junior Collgs: “Th junior collg may, and is likly to, dvlop a diffrnt
type of curriculum suited to the larger and ever changing civic, social, religious, and vocation
nds of th ntir community in which th collg is locatd” (Bogu, 1950, p. xvii as cited in

20
Cohen & Brawer, 2003). The American Association of Junior Colleges was later renamed the
American Association for Community Colleges (AACC).
Over time, the AACC maintained its stance that community colleges need to play a
significant role as workforce development providers. For example, in its Commission on the
Future of Community Colleges (AACC, 1988), the AACC claimed that community colleges
should be the architect organizations for addressing workforce, economic development, and
community issues (AACC, 1988). This comprehensive mission translates into addressing the
needs of various stakeholders in local college districts. One offering has included contract and
bespoke training, which helps satisfy local business needs with benefits that have flowed from
this sector to surrounding communities, states, and the nation (Dougherty & Bakia, 2000).
The impact of business training requirements on contract training at community colleges
has been documented by academics. Workers needed to stay up to date and highly skilled in new
areas in order to adapt to new technologies, work processes, and environments (Dougherty &
Bakia, 2000). Manufacturing and service businesses, which require both technical and "soft"
skills, saw these demands. Teamwork, effective communication, decision-making, and
leadership at all levels are just as important skills in the workplace as computer programming,
word processing, and engine calibration for automobiles and aircraft (Senge, 1990). According to
Soares (2010), community colleges' capacity to provide a wide range of vocational and
occupational courses, flexibility in course scheduling, and adaptability and resourcefulness in
arranging the appropriate training at the appropriate time bodes well for this industry.
Community colleges have bolstered their training opportunities through their own
assertive actions, whereas businesses have played a significant role in the rise of contract
training. According to Dougherty and Bakia (2000), they collaborate with government agencies

21
that are interested in pursuing economic and workforce development. These academics stated,
"Community colleges and government bodies need to extract resources from their environment
and this leads them to be active, modifying their environment as much as being modified by it"
(p. 208), utilizing "resource dependency theory in organizational sociology" (Dougherty &
Bakia, 2000, p. 207). Numerous sources described the development of community colleges into
"economic engines" (Cohen & Brawer, 2003; Dougherty & Bakia, 2000; Gruber, 2000; Zeiss,
1997). Gruber wrote in his research from 2000:
Academic campuses have seen vocational education doubled in the last few years and
contract training become a major revenue source. New community colleges have been created
with the primary aim of serving industry. For some states, community colleges and technical
colleges, with their capacity for large-scale advanced training, have become economic
development tools to lure major employers. (p. 4)
The role of community colleges in helping to boost workforce development was seen
during the 1960s with the creation of the Manpower Training Act, in the 1970s with the
implementation of the Comprehensive Employment Training Act, and in the 1980s with the
enactment of the Job Training Partnership Act (Dougherty & Bakia, 2000). These efforts were
vital in responding to economic downturns, particularly in the 1980s when the United States
experienced a severe economic recession (Dougherty & Bakia, 2000). The current economic
woes of the 21st century, including declining stock market values, increases in unemployment
rates, increases in the number of home foreclosures, and frozen credit markets require national
leaders to take an even more aggressive role in stimulating the economy through innovative and
creative strategies (Uhalde, 2011). Community college and business partnerships offer an
important approach in addressing the challenges of a failing economy, while simultaneously

22
generating its own benefits from solid and long-lasting collaborations. The benefits to both
community colleges and businesses are enormous (Kisker & Carducci, 2003).
Through contract training and economic development efforts, college enrollments have
increased as workers who enrolled as college students continued their education beyond their
immediate workforce training experience (Dougherty & Bakia, 2000; Zeiss, 1997). Enrollments
from contract training helped shore up needed revenue in the midst of declining government
funding (Cohen & Brawer, 2003; Paulsen & Smart, 2001). Despite the resulting enrollment
increases, community colleges still needed more revenue.
Community colleges have become more entrepreneurial by generating revenues outside
of the traditional funding sources from tuition and government revenues. To a limited extent,
these strategies have affected the culture and climate of community colleges where business
center activities are viewed more respectfully because of their business and government
connections (Dougherty & Bakia, 2000; Zeiss, 1997). For many colleges, contract training was a
way to buttrss lagging rvnus and to dmonstrat collgs’ indpndnt thinking in mting
the needs and interests of diverse constituencies (Dougherty & Bakia, 2000).
Community colleges continue to make in-roads into the business-training world. Yet their
competitors are just as resourceful. More organizations are establishing in-house business
training departments. Still more businesses are outsourcing their training to private training
firms, proprietary institutions, and four-year higher education institutions which all compete for
the same training dollars that community colleges seek (Rivera & Paradise, 2006). As
competition for contract training increases, colleges move to solidify their relations with their
customrs to crat a strongr, rciprocal bond. According to Ziss (1997), “Partnrships and
collaborations with businesses and governments have become critical for those colleges who

23
wish to remain customer-drivn and community basd” (p. xiv). Colleges take considerable steps
to rspond to thir constitunts’ nds, particularly th nds of th businss community.
However, many college and business partnerships fail, despite the changes in college curricula,
efforts to keep pace with technology, and attempts to remain cost-conscious (Bergquist et al.,
1995).
Purpose of Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges
The purpose of a PPP is to use the resources of all partners to create alternative college
education programs that are tightly linked to regional economic development and labor force
needs (Soares, 2010). The programs typically enroll nontraditional students, a classification that
includes both younger workforce entrants and older ones in need of skills and education
upgrades. The expected outcome of a PPP is to ensure that each student who completes these
programs and postsecondary credentials will have the skills that meet the needs of area
businesses, improve regional/national competitiveness and earn a family-sustaining wage as well
as be prepared for further learning. Postsecondary credentials can include occupational licenses,
technical certification, associates, and bachelor degrees (Soares, 2010).
The only way to develop curriculum and instruction models that deliver this skill set to
large numbers of Americans is for business and education leaders to build collaborations that
leverage their combined knowledge of labor markets, skills, pedagogy and students. This
integration of vocation and employment-oriented goals in academic educational programs has
been termed The New Vocationalism movement. The movement seeks to create a more wellrounded education that satisfies both the demand for skilled employees as well as the need for a
knowledgeable and engaged citizentry by integrating the three historic missions of community
colleges: university transfer education, vocational education and, more recently, developmental

24
education. A central tenet of New Vocationalism is the need for institutional innovations to
identify new models of community college education as a way to better prepare individuals for
high wage, high skill jobs. Community college-industry partnerships (CCIPs) are one such
institutional innovation. The purpose of these partnerships is most often to enhance the
community collgs’ historic mission of univrsity transfr ducation with altrnat pathways to
postsecondary credentials with labor market value for individuals who are not on a traditional
college track. This may include youth and adults with low literacy, dislocated workers and
English as a Second Language learners. Strong Partnerships tend to develop around local and
regional economic and workforce development needs and can take many different forms from
joint investment in facilities to industry sector partnerships (Soares, 2010).
Impacts, Contributions, and Success Rates of Public-Private Partnerships with Community
Colleges
According to Maltin (2019), the success of PPPs had more to do with productive working
relationships rather than strict contractual obligations. Specifically, successful projects shared the
following: a commitment to a strong partnership beyond the terms of the contract; built-in
mechanisms to share perspectives about the project (especially problems and concerns); and
effective ways to rebound from failures to deliver. Additionally, core functions of a successful
public-private partnership typically address a specific outcome: Matching workers to business
needs, strengthening linkages among systems and/or access to training (Kathy & Kappan, 2008).
The California Green Collar Jobs Act of 2008 is a good example of matching workers to
business needs. It requires the creation of a council responsible for matching programs,
strategies, and resources to workforce needs generated by growth in the state's green economy
(Kathy & Kappan, 2008). The state of Louisiana demonstrates strengthening linkages among

25
systems by eliminating the Department of Labor and transferring its duties to the State
Workforce Commission (now called the Workforce Investment Council). Its primary goal is on
integrating job training, employment and education to effectively and efficiently administer the
stat’s unmploymnt and workrs compnsation programs in a samlss dlivry systm (Kathy
& Kappan, 2008). Access to training is demonstrated with the state of Vermont where it requires
the commissioner of education to examine how funding is paid for students (including adult
learners) to attend regional technical center programs, and to propose solutions on barriers to
entry (Kathy & Kappan, 2008). Although these are noteworthy examples, there is still very little
known about the effectiveness of these innovations and thorough evidence is limited (Soares,
2010). Accepting this, there are related initiatives that have gained documented impact that can
be examined.
Evidence of lessons learned can be gathered from literature on Sector Initiatives that
work closely with community colleges. According to a 2007 Workforce Strategies Initiative
Aspen Institute report, program completers that participated in a sector initiative, increased their
average monthly income by an estimated $1,500. Similarly, another Aspen Institute survey of
compltrs within six sctor initiativ programs found that working participants’ arnings ros an
average of $8,580 before the program to $14,040 the year following, and $17,752 in the 2nd year
after completion (Soares, 2010). It was also noted that successful programs can cost between
$5,000 - $100,000 per student, underscoring the importance of public-private partnerships.
These practices use partnership resources, relationships, and activities to build
alternatives to the semester-based, full-time attendance model associated with traditional college
students. Developed by the League of Innovation in Community Colleges from field research in
CCIPs. Soares (2010) outlined the key activities typically undertaken by PPPs. These include:

26
1. Curriculum and instructional transformation: partnerships cause meaningful changes
to traditional curriculum and instructional practices at participating community
colleges. New models include: contextualized, modularized and competency-based
curriculum and accelerated degree completion, workplace-based learning, and learn
and earn models. Employers play a key role in curriculum development and
credential validation.
2. Academic and Social Support: partnerships create sustained academic and career
navigation supports for students. Examples: Form small learning communities; fund a
career center that provides financial aid, academic and career advising.
3. Professional Development: partnerships provide resources for community college
faculty and staff to develop skills needed to design new curricula, teach integrated
developmental, occupational and academic course work and better track student
progress and employer needs.
4. Shared Resources for Sustainability: Partnerships contribute to sustaining newly
developed educational programs over time as well as create a foundation for new
partnerships. Examples include cultivating board level leadership for partnerships and
co-invest in facilities and equipment.
5. Systemic Institutional Alignment/Improvement: Partnerships generate institutionwide changes in community college mission, strategic planning and resource
allocation. Examples: simplify enrollment for non-traditional students; Integrate
funding across missions and use data-driven program accountability and articulation
of credit for learning.

27
While industry or cross-sector partnerships are an excellent way for institutional leaders
to overcome the preceding challenges, these partnerships are difficult to establish. The few
resources community colleges are distributed across the many institutional missions they juggle,
often placing cross-sector partnerships on the backburner. Because industry often operates in
silos with few connections to education, cross-sector partnerships are typically the result of ad
hoc processes or the initiatives of individual faculty. Consequently, these partnerships are
difficult to sustain (Brown, 2018; McLaughlin et al., 2017). Additionally, even when companies
are secure with financial resources and human capital, they are still finding it challenging to run
partnerships with community colleges effectively. Even more challenging to properly align and
achieve impact when various stakeholders within an ecosystem have their own ambitions
(Frolund et al., 2018). According to Frolund et al. (2018), frustration and the sense of mismatch
among both corporations and colleges was experienced, as it relates to culture and governance
when they collaborate. There are many factors that contribute to the frustration, the core being
college culture which is typically characterized by high autonomy and distributed governance,
does not match appropriately to the corporate culture. Additionally, it can be overwhelming for
companies to navigate the wide array of faculty, programs, and other modes of engagement.
Frameworks and Processes of Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges
Insights about how to avert PPP failure and increase faculty involvement in these
engagements may be gained from understanding the frameworks and processes used to initiate
and execute PPPs. Understanding how these arrangements happen may provide the context for
understanding faculty involvement. Many scholars (e.g., Austin, 2000; Ball & Payne, 1998;
Wohlstetter et al., 2005) believe that partnerships and strategic alliances must evolve
meticulously and deliberately for successful and sustainable results. In addition, some

28
characterize the formation and management of partnerships in phases. The investigation of
partnerships might be crafted to examine the formation and sustainability of relationships as
three stages: formative, operational, and evaluative (Wohlstetter et al., 2005). Scholars use
different terms to identify these stages but in essence remain fairly consistent in how partnerships
might be characterized (Austin, 2000; Ball & Payne, 1998; Gruber, 2000). A summary of the
different scholars used in this literature review and a description of the stages for forming a
sustaining and solid partnership is provided.
Austin (2000) described a practical framework for how organizations might formulate
dpr alliancs othr than th traditional philanthropic rlationships. Austin’s work providd
insights on how community colleges might tailor their approaches and manage their strategic
relationships with businesses for the purposes of workforce training. Wohlstetter et al. (2005)
presented their perspectives about the evolution of alliances as a result of influences from outside
forces. Their work contributed greatly to this discussion regarding the phases of partnerships and
alliances. Ball and Payne (1998) gave practical advice in their white paper presented at the
EDUCAUSE conference on building strong alliances and making them last. Gruber (2000)
described how selected businesses approach and sustained their partnerships with community
colleges. This work presented a different and useful slant on partnerships from the business side.
Community college scholars, such as Spangler (2002), Sundberg (2002), and Orr (2001) offered
specific advice for developing partnerships and alliances from the community college
perspective. Their works mostly centered on how to create successful partnerships and were
generally in agreement with Austin (2000) and Ball and Payne (1998). Ideas from scholars,
representing the private and public sectors, were used to summarize the characteristics that build
and sustain strategic alliances among community colleges and businesses.

29
Formative Stage of Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges
Austin (2000) proposed that formative stages in developing a strategic alliance can occur
as a rsult of “happnstanc” or through a dlibrat procss. To illustrat “happnstanc”
situations, Austin described an alliance between Starbucks and CARE, a leading humanitarian
organization fighting poverty worldwide. The idea for collaboration came to Peter Blomquist, a
CARE executive, who when stopping into Starbucks one day for a cup of coffee, thought about
the possibility of a connection between CARE and the coffee company. While reading a
Starbucks brochur, Ptr was amazd to find that th company’s supply for coff in diffrnt
countries was located in some of the same countries whr CARE opratd. H rcalld, “Thr
was a picture of the coffee buyer, Dave Olsen, and I figured that would be a good place to start. I
got back to th offic and calld him” (Austin, 2000, p. 42). Whn Ptr calld and bgan talking
to Dave Olsen, the two executives struck a harmonious chord and realized the potential of an
alliance between their two organizations. Over the next several weeks through numerous
conversations and personal meetings, they gained enormous respect for each other and forged a
long-term relationship that benefited both Starbucks and CARE.
Happenstance. This “happnstanc” approach is applicabl in community collgs as
there are community and business connections that can lead to alliances and collaborations.
Community college leaders and managers are conscious of the opportunities that can arise under
the most unexpected circumstances. Surveying business publications, casual conversations with
community leaders and constituents in diverse settings, and discussions with trustee members
from the business sector can translate into opportunities not foreseen in formalized experiences.
These informal networking strategies can extend from the boardroom to the golf course.

30
Conversations with employees from business, civic, and social arenas are resources that help
identify company needs without formal surveys (Austin, 2000).
In his rsarch, Grubr (2000) corroboratd Austin’s prspctiv about "happnstanc."
One partnership he studied was created as a result of a college seminar. LaGuardia Community
College offered a Total Quality Management (TQM) seminar where Sequins staff members were
in attendance. The insights gained from the LaGuardia seminar helped Sequins, a small New
York fashion design company, realize the possible benefits from such training. Sequins managers
partnered with LaGuardia to offer on-site business training to upper management. The
“happnstanc” bginnings of this partnrship mrgd as th company managmnt found a
way to train their staff on how to improve the quality of their products and lower business costs.
Competition with global markets in China and India required that Sequins management team
become more efficient and the college helped to meet this goal.
The Deliberate Process. Wohlstetter et al. (2005), Sundberg (2002), and Ball and Payne
(1998) suggested a more deliberate approach to initiating partnerships and alliances rather than
totally rlying on Austin’s (2000) “happnstanc” prmis. For ths scholars, using a
formalized approach in forging business and college relationships is essential. Ball and Payne
(1998) suggested that higher education institutions must be diligent and purposeful in assessing
their values and cultures to determine their contributions to any alliance that might be formed. At
the same time, institutions must assess the values and cultures of prospective partners, as to
ensure that the goals and priorities of each partner are compatible. From a business perspective,
Gruber (2000) identified deliberate processes that businesses in his study employed. Of the four
businesses considering community colleges as training providers (i.e., Boeing, DaimierChrysler, Intel, Sequins), two used the Request for Proposals (RFP) format. Interested colleges

31
had to submit proposals that addressed corporate criteria for flexibility in course delivery, history
of working with corporations, level of auxiliary services, and cost. The deliberate process is a
purposeful experience designed to target suitable partnerships.
Generating Value. Whil “happnstanc” and dlibrat procsss approach partnrship
formation differently, Austin (2000) and others reported on the requirement to sort out the needs
btwn partnrs arly in th xprinc. Austin calls this procss “gnrating valu” whr
“vry rlationship involvs an xchang of valu among th participants” (p. 87). As partnrs
mbark on a nw vntur togthr, thy must mak a dtrmination of “th potntial and th
actual valu of th collaborativ activitis” (p. 87). This is achivd by addressing questions
about the worth of the alliance. What is the value of the alliance with this particular
organization? How can partners ensure a relationship that is fair and equitable to all parties
involved? How can each participant give as much as it gets? What actions can be taken to sustain
an enriching and vibrant alliance? According to Austin (2000), each partner should consider
these questions individually and collectively. Gruber (2000) agreed with the generating value
concept. His view is that not all community colleges are well suited to offer training to
corporations, no matter how they may desire and try. Some colleges do not have the breadth of
faculty experience and comprehensiveness to address the needs of corporations, particularly
large entities desiring to train large number of employees. Because of the shortfall that some
colleges may have in this particular area, Gruber felt that all areas of a potential partnership need
to be examined before commitments are made.
Wohlstetter et al. (2005) also touted the importance of determining the value of the
partnership. In the formative stages of a relationship, higher education institutions and businesses
nd to ask qustions about prospctiv partnrs’ nds, assts, and goals. Whil som scholars

32
fl that thir partnrs’ goals must b vry closly alignd, Wohlstttr t al. (2005) assrtd that
partnrs’ goals should b compatibl but not ncssarily th sam. Th partnrs must hav a
sense that there is mutual benefit to the proposed relationship. In contrast, other experts in
community colleges (Buettner, Morrison, & Wasicek, 2002; Orr, 2001) seem to take a much
more assertive stance about assessment and goal alignment. For them, community colleges must
ensure that the goals and objectives of the respective partners are aligned more succinctly than
suggested by Austin and others.
Operational Stage of Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges
Managing Relationships. After the formative stage, colleges and businesses must plan
and develop ways to help ensure that the partnership runs smoothly (Ball & Payne, 1998;
Wohlstetter et al., 2005). Partners have to develop a game plan that defines roles and
responsibilities, while at the same time, sorting out how they can work together in harmony.
Grubr (2000) wrot, “For Chryslr’s initial wholsal faculty rtraining projct, th partnrs had
to plan and develop curricula covering two levels of training, create 402 class sections, establish
guidelines, orient employers, find faculty, find space, monitor outcomes and deal with inevitable
conflicts” (p. 16). Th collaboration of th oprations btwn businsss and highr ducation
institutions is difficult. Like other higher education institutions, community colleges have to
contend with the bureaucratic structures and processes that are more stringent than for
businesses. For colleges, obstacles may include (a) obtaining approval from local faculty bodies
and education boards to offer new courses, and (b) meeting federal and state regulations that
affect college off-site activities (Sundberg, 2002).
The Role of Leadership. One strategy that facilitates the process of establishing new
alliances is the role of leadership in both partnering organizations. Certainly, leadership is

33
important in initiating and managing partnerships. However, scholars do not agree on the
specific role of leaders in these relationships. Austin (2000) suggested that leaders must have a
personal connection as the partnership was proposed; otherwise, the relationship will not be
sustained. The example of the two top executives from CARE and Starbucks (i.e., Peter
Blomquist and Dave Olsen), illustrated how a personal connection can translate into a strong
alliance. Olsen reported that the partnership has changed his and Peter Blomquist’s lif. Th
connection between the two individuals helped build a relationship between their organizations,
Starbucks and CARE. Through their ingenuity and tenacity, Blomquist and Olsen shared the
dream of an alliance with their superiors, colleagues, and subordinates during joint meetings,
retreats, and workshops. Their enthusiasm helped both organizations develop mutual
understanding and trust.
Wohlstttr t al. (2005) also xprssd th importanc of “champions” in thir work.
Presidents and CEOs can convene meetings, introduce others to the possibility of a partnership,
and keep the alliance participants on track. In this role, leaders are architects, information
brokers, and boundary spanners (Wohlstetter et al., 2005). As architects, leaders can orchestrate
staff involvement and functions in day-to-day operations. As information brokers, leaders must
ensure that information is shared among partners. Misinformation and lack of shared information
can eventually erode the relationship. As a boundary spanner, leaders scan the external
environment or work world to ensure that other stakeholders and constituents understand the
nature and the direction of the alliance. Leaders must be prepared to handle any resistant
behaviors or buffer any undesirable noise from critics and observers (Wohlstetter et al., 2005).
Ball and Payne (1998) took a different position about the role of leaders in partnerships.
Their views were that in an alliance there is no need for champions. They reported that one or

34
two persons pushing for an alliance between organizations does not necessarily lead to success.
Ladrs’ bhaviors hav a grat dal of influnc on prsons within organizations, and it is th
prsidnt’s or Chif Excutiv Officr’s (CEO) rsponsibility to ngage in non-intrusive ways
that support th allianc. Actions from ladrs can crat “buy in” for th partnrship such that
others will want to embrace it and feel a sense of accomplishments when goals are achieved.
Senge (1990) wrote that leaders should be like designers. While somewhat invisible, the designer
has a powrful rol that “ncourags and mpowrs othrs who tak prsonal prid in producing
rsults that popl truly car about” (Sng, 1990, p. 341). For community collgs involvd in a
strategic alliance with businesses, this leadership role and style can encourage constituents to act
creatively, independently, and enthusiastically.
Sustaining the Alliance Through Communication. Poor communication among and
between partner organizations can dismantle an alliance (Ball & Payne, 1998). Scholars are in
agreement with respect to the need for continuous discussion regardless of the format.
Wohlstetter et al. (2005) suggested that both formal and informal systems of communications be
established to ensure that information flows within and between organizations. The formal
mechanics for information flow include meetings, letters, emails, memos, and faxes. However,
more importantly is the informal communication flow, which entails talking face-to-face. Partner
employees need to feel comfortable in dialoguing about matters regarding the relationship.
Leaders have a responsibility to ensure the free flow of information, and the connections people
make within and between organizations.
Austin (2000) and Wohlstetter et al. (2005) took a slightly different slant on the role and
importance of communication. These scholars believe in the free-flow of information but
reported that it should be more directed, perhaps through the establishment of joint committees

35
assigned by specific areas. Gruber (2000) also advocated the formation of a joint college and
business group. He asserted that such a group shapes the partnership by planning and
implementing the training, and by imprinting the values, beliefs, and expectations of the
rspctiv partnrs’ workplac on th training program. Anothr stratgy is th cration of
partner managers in the respective organizations. Partner managers can communicate on a
frequent basis on different matters. As the alliance evolves and the two organizations come to
rely upon one another, the goals and plans that were established at the formative stages of the
partnership are achieved, the alliance evolves, and trust among the partners grows.
Communication within organizations is just as important as communication between
partners. As noted earlier, Stamps (1995) described how the Collagen Corporation in California
was unabl to ngotiat a contract with a community collg bcaus of th faculty mmbrs’
unwillingness to adjust their course scheduling to accommodate business schedules. Lack of
consistent and widespread communications within partner organizations can sabotage any
relationship. It is important to apprise key faculty and constituents about forming partnerships so
that they might have an opportunity to dialogue and give input into the developmental and
operational phases in the relationship. Orr (2002) stated that developing partnerships requires
that ky actors must b attntiv to thir own “organizational attributs” (p. 41). Continuous
communication about the developments and expectation of a partnership is critical.
Evaluation Stage of Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges
An effective evaluation must be tied to an accountability plan, which defines roles and
responsibilities, how the partners intend to measure their achievements, and what constitutes
success (Lancaster, 2005; Wohlstetter et al., 2005). Accountability plans provide an operational
guide that can be used to periodically monitor who is to perform what functions and to determine

36
how well the alliance is progressing. Without a plan, partners are unable to determine the extent
and effectiveness of the relationship. Most colleges and businesses engaged in collaborative
efforts build into their contracts ways to determine, for example, the effectiveness of training.
Enhanced worker skill levels and productivity might measure training effectiveness. If specific
initial goals are achieved, other indicators of success might include changes in employment rates,
and household income in the college district. One important aspect of the evaluative stage is that
outcome measures must be agreed upon and measured continuously. When there is evidence that
performance expectations are not being achieved, prudent intervention may be taken to redirect,
refocus, or terminate the partnership (Buettner et al., 2002).
Getting key success factors right is so critical that it has caused the creation of a new
organizational typ, th “intrmdiary” xmplifid by th sctor partnership noted in the CCIP
definition. An intermediary provides a neutral platform from which community college and
industry leaders can discuss their mutual interest as well as engage other regional partners with
whom they have common cause. These can include community-based organizations; labor
unions and apprenticeship committees; other colleges; workforce development agencies; human
service agencies; and economic development agencies (Soares, 2010).
Success Factors of Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges
For public-private partnerships to be successful, the partnership must lay a solid
foundation of mutual understanding. Carrie B. Kisker and Rozanna Carducci enumerate five
success factors for partnership success in the UCLA Community College Review. These success
factors are:
1. Recognize a local/regional economic development challenge that calls for
collaborative attention.

37
2. Establish a shared mission and goals.
3. Ensure that value is achieved for all partners (including students).
4. Have strong executive leadership from both the college and industry participants
5. Develop a governance and accountability mechanisms (Soares, 2010).
Additional success factors include (a) mutual understanding; (b) strong, consistent
communication; (c) attempts to gain a greater understanding of respective partners; and (d)
commitment to the goals and mission of each partner contribute to sustainability and longevity
(Austin, 2000; Ball & Payne, 1998; Wohlstetter, Smith, & Malloy, 2005).
Obstacles and Threats of Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges
Although PPPs facilitate workforce and community development, many are fraught with
deficiencies and lack the required substance to sustain a long-lasting relationship (Bergquist,
Betwee, & Meuel, 1995). A study conducted by Bergquist et al. (1995) substantiated the
difficulties in maintaining these partnerships. They concluded that: (a) one-third of the
partnerships in their study failed, (b) many of the partnerships that did survive underwent
extensive revisions from their original structure, and (c) those partners that remained in the
rlationship did so bcaus on or both partis could not “xtricat thmslvs from th unhappy
circumstancs” (p. 10). Partnrships and collaborativ rlationships among the 48 community
colleges in Illinois exhibit similar patterns of instability and failure. The Illinois Community
College Board (ICCB) reports (2001, 2007) showed a decline over several years in collaborative
relationships between community colleges and businesses. Austin (2000) speculated that factors
such as the lack of continuous and multi-level communication, and organizational
incompatibility diminish the possibility of prosperous relationships.

38
To promote systematic innovation, policymakers should review federal, state and local
financ and rgulation to nsur th “good practic” innovations ar facilitatd. Fdral and stat
policy makers can take several actions to support successful partnership, including ensuring that
formula funding streams and regulation do not stifle good practice when partners are building an
alternative education program; using competitive grant funds to promote partnerships that
emphasize sustainable, systemic change; and continuing to emphasize desired student outcomes
to keep community colleges and partners focused on innovation (Soares, 2010).
New vocationalism, with its focus on the integrated skills sets and innovative
instructional models, provides a framework to address these needs of the community college
student by challenging the existing silos of community college instruction. It envisions the
possibility of classroom learning with real world content; values applied and work-based
learning experiences; and is focused on generating benefits to students, community colleges and
businesses. This is an outward looking focus with an eye toward value creation for the economy
and society (Soares, 2010).
Workforce Development and Readiness
Workforce development is a term used with increasing frequency among education
practitioners, policy makers, and scholars alike. Despite the increasing use of the term, there has
been limited discussion about its meaning and implications for established fields of study
(Giloth, 2000; Grubb, 1999; Harrison & Weiss, 1998). Workforce development has evolved to
describe any one of a relatively wide range of national and international policies and programs
related to learning for work (Jacobs & Hawley, 2009). For example, many professionals involved
in administering U.S. secondary vocational education programs, welfare-to-work and other
public assistance programs, and regional economic development initiatives now use workforce

39
development to describe their services. Several recent pieces of state and federal legislation in
the United States use the term to describe various youth vocational training, adult training and
retraining, and related employment initiatives. For example, the federal Workforce Investment
Act in 1998 strengthened the integrated system of financing while the State of Florida’s craftd
legislation in 2000 creating a state wide agency, Workforce Florida, to handle both workforce
and welfare policy.
As a result of these legislative and policy changes, many U.S. states have included
“workforc dvlopmnt” in naming various governmental coordinating boards, initiatives, and
task forces (Grubb, Badway, Bell, Chi, King, & Herr, 1999). To a varying extent, adult educators
and human resource development professionals also have begun to use the term in the context of
their fields. Recent studies from Bates and Redmann (2002) as well as Jacobs (2000) describe the
particular relationship between human resource development and workforce development.
Whil Europ’s trminology focuss on Vocational Education and Training through th
“DaVinci” Initiativ, national govrnmnts in Europ and Asia hav startd to us th trm
workforce development. The United Kingdom, for example, uses the term extensively to
describe local agents of education and training, while the term appears to be used in the recent
“Dpartmnt for Education and Skills” plan to rfr gnrally to training for adults. Singapor,
for example, uses workforce development as the name for its government agency focused on
education and training.
Jacobs and Hawley (2009) have concluded that the reason the term workforce
development is used to describe such a range of activities, disciplines, and organizations is
because the success of any one program or initiative depends on the connections to other
programs that otherwise would have considered in isolation from each other (Hawley et al.,

40
2003). For example, vocational educators have increasingly found that secondary-education
programs for youth depend more and more on organization-based training programs. Adult
retraining programs depend more and more on the delivery of community-based social services.
Adult educators have concluded that helping individuals acquire new sets of basic skills requires
substantial investment in integrated skills rather than literacy programs alone (Comings, Reder,
& Sum, 2001; Murnane & Levy, 1996). Finally, an increasing number of human resource
development scholars use the term national human resource development to describe the
articulation between government and private-sector programs (McLean, 2003).
While the employment and training industry as a whole provides necessary support
services, connections to employers, skills training, and other programs that facilitate job
readiness, placements, and career advancement for disadvantaged workers and job seekers
(Melendez, 2004), workforce development as a field encompasses the traditional social and
supportive services necessary for job seekers to succeed in the labor market, as well as employer
services and employer-intermediary relationships that influence successful recruitment and
incorporation of workers into the workplace, career advancement, and increased productivity
(Melendez, 2004). Multiple players are involved in the workforce development system. These
players include workforce investment boards, city, state, and federal agencies, business and labor
associations, neighborhood and community-based organizations, public-private partnerships,
educational institutions, foundations, religious, and charitable organizations, individuals who
influence career choices, such as parents and guidance counselors.
Workforce readiness combines traditional training models historically focused on
vocational training with classroom pdagogy to crat job radinss training that follows a “work
first” philosophy. They include greater experimentation with the program design, greater

41
specialization among service providers, greater employer participation in workforce development
programs, and greater collaboration among various institutions and service providers (Melendez,
2004).
The Need for Workforce Development
It has become increasingly clear that the well-being of nations – considered from both
economic and social perspectives – is dependent in large measure on the competence of its
people (Ashton et al., 1999). Human competence has been defined as the potential to achieve
valued accomplishments (Gilbert, 1978; Jacobs, 2001). The focus of competence is primarily
from an economic perspective, where individuals improve their competence to improve
performance and productivity in organizations. However, there is a larger focus of competence to
participate in civic society or competence to engage in social action, which is important
particularly from an adult education perspective. Illeris (2003) suggests that lifelong learning
does not only have a quantitative focus on more learning for adults, but also suggests that
individuals need to respond to on-going social changes. Societies rely on their major institutions,
such as schools, community colleges, universities, government agencies, unions, organizations,
among others, to acquire human competence. Sustaining national and organizational well-being
depends more and more on having human competence available, and those areas of human
competence will likely change on a continuing basis (Judy & D'Amico, 1997).
Workforce development programs are generally understood to produce economic and
social benefits for individuals and their communities (Grubb & Lazerson, 2004). A fully
functioning workforce system provides a framework that creates linkages and career pathways
for critical careers, helps institutions, businesses, and individuals adapt in order to meet changing

42
needs, innovates and pools new resources for changing objectives, and maximizes the potential
of individuals, businesses, and regions (Melendez, 2004).
Jacobs and Hawley (2009) elaborated that workforce development is needed due to five
interacting drivers: globalization, technology, new economy, political change, and demographic
shifts. These forces create challenges for adult education. These challenges are described in the
following sections.
Globalization as a Driver of Workforce Development Programs
Thomas Friedman (2000), the political writer and commentator, boldly asserted that
today’s “global” world cam into existence upon the fall of the Berlin Wall on October 11, 1989.
In addition to its symbolic value, this historical event made it possible for the unrestricted flow
of people and information across all national borders in Europe, from which all other human
transactions could follow. At first glance, there seems much truth to this proposition. In contrast
to previous eras of global economic development, the current situation has occurred rapidly and
at a level of intensity not experienced previously.
As a result of globalization, there have resulted unprecedented connections among
markets and a qualitative difference in the way that different countries interact with each other in
those markets. Consider that internationally recognized standards, such as ISO 9000, allow even
the most remotely-located manufacturing operations in China or Vietnam to compete with
modern production facilities located in more developed countries. Thus, in spite of current events
that might suggest the pitfalls of having open borders and markets, global competition will
remain a phenomenon for the foreseeable future.
Competition among nations also raises the need for workforce development. Whenever
nations seek to facilitate economic growth, the needs of current and future workers become an

43
issue of common concern (Ashton, Green, James, & Sung, 1999). Within this context, workforce
development has become a critical part of a broader economic development strategy (Giloth,
2000). In a recent paper for the 2002 UNEVOC-Canada conference, Hall (2002) described the
negative impact of increased globalization on adult education, focusing on the impact on adult
learning. Hall (2002) focuses on the importance of using adult education to respond to the
problems of globalization, both in terms of facilitating adult learning in the workplace and
resisting the negative impact of globalization.
Technology as a Driver of Workforce Development Programs
Technology comes in different forms and each form has affected the extent and rate of
globalization. Technological change is particularly important to the development of human
capital, because changes in technology work with planned workforce development to increase
the productivity of workers/firms in all sectors (Foster & Rosenzweig, 1996; Levy & Murnane,
2004; Rosenzweig, 1995).
In terms of communications technology, globalization could not occur without an
efficient vehicle by which to send and receive information across great distances. Microchips,
satellites, and the Internet enable the immediate access to information regardless of physical
location. Without this ability, developing countries would be incapable of becoming serviceproviders and producers of products on an equal footing with companies in developed countries.
Communications technology allows companies to invest in and locate operations closer to where
the specific human talent and cost-effectiveness might exist.
For instance, the emergence of customer call centers and data processing operations in
India to serve the U.S. marketplace illustrates how technology makes distance transparent
(Jacobs & Hawley, 2009). Customers are usually unaware of the origin point of the service

44
delivery, but they are aware of the quality of service they receive. In the same way, it is said that
manufacturing technology enable organizations to manage their operations better, resulting in
higher quality standards and lower costs to consumers. The changes in technology also present
significant problems for professionals in adult learning. Technology presents both problems and
opportunities for adult education. Technology increases access to learning, making it more
widely available in rural areas as well as for individuals who want on demand learning.
However, there are major questions in the adult education literature about the
implications of technological change. As described in a recent book, Sawchuk (2003) illustrates
the difficulty in characterizing the role of technological change in adult learning, but recognizing
both that it increases access, but also is imbedded within the current class and social structure
(Sawchuk, 2003).
New Economy as a Driver of Workforce Development Programs
The new economy is generally defined by the attributes of free-market capitalism. Global
competition will presumably maintain cost pressures on products and services, thus ensuring a
sustainable cycle of high efficiency, high quality, and low inflation. Increasingly, many scholars
have proposed that these assumptions have been put into some doubt first by the Asian currency
crisis in 1997 and then by the current economic downturn. The new economy has also been
tempered by the growing awareness of the changing global demographics (Dychtwald, Erickson,
& Morison, 2006). Over the next 30 years, most developed countries are faced with increasing
numbers of individuals receiving retirement benefits and decreasing numbers of individuals
actually working and making contributions to retirement accounts. The new economy has been
open to continual debate and some keen observers, such as Peter Drucker (1993), have even
expressed skepticism whether the new economy really existed in the first place.

45
The new economy presents important challenges to adult education specifically, and
workforce development more broadly. The economic shifts have resulted in many new job
classifications which increase the need for training and adult education in specific fields.
However, the new economy view of economic growth overlooks the fact that despite the
development of a wide array of new occupations, most of the job growth and much of what is
required of workers, is within low skill service sector jobs (Levy & Murnane, 2004; Osterman,
1999).
Political Change as a Driver of Workforce Development Programs
Important political change has been observed in both domestic and international politics.
Recent international political changes include the emergence of the European Union as a single
marketplace, greater openness of many countries to foreign direct investment (FDI), legislated
transparency in national financial systems, and an overall movement towards democratization
and private ownership.
China provides an illustrative example of this process. As it has entered the World Trade
Organization (WTO), Chinese officials subsequently announced it would sell shares of its
railway system, without placing any limits on ownership, as a means to finance upgrades to the
rail system and the eventual construction of a modern highway system (The Economist, 2001).
Involving foreign ownership in such large-scale public projects depends on having reliable
domestic financial systems and the belief that such decisions reflect the best interests of the
people.
National training systems have changed along with this larger shift in political structures
and philosophies. Historically, the United States had very few interrelationships among
government, business, and unions in terms of education and training (Weir, 1992). This historic

46
reluctance emerged in the early 20th century through the Great Depression. The current national
training system in the United States is shifting, incorporating more of the specific relationships
between key political agents like business and government, although union influence has
continued to slip as the proportion of workers represented by unions declines (Giloth, 2000;
Osterman, 1999). In contrast, the various European and Asian models of national training
systems have rested on corporatism, a political philosophy that emphasizes the mutual
dependence of key government, union, and business groups in producing a skilled workforce
(Crouch, Finegold, & Sako, 1999; Schmitter, 1979).
Demographic Shifts as a Driver of Workforce Development Programs
Finally, two demographic shifts influence the emergence of workforce development
(Carnevale & Fry, 2001). As stated, the most powerful of these is the retirement of the baby
boom generation. For instance, the U.S. workforce, which has grown in size by more than 50
percent over the past 20 years, will slow its growth dramatically over the next few decades. To
replace these individuals in the workforce will not be easy without increasing the quality and
quantity of educational experience given to succeeding generations.
The second demographic shift, which conflicts with the first shift, is the movement from
the smaller Generation X cohort to the much larger Generation Y cohort. As a result, the larger
Generation Y cohort will likely find problems in finding adequate training and educational
opportunities, given the funding cutbacks of the early 1990s in both the private and public
sectors. These individuals will not be able to make substantive contributions to their respective
societies without access to training and education.

47
History of Workforce Development Programs
It is widely acknowledged by practitioners and other professionals in the training field
that the employment services industry has undergone considerable evolution over the past
decade. Systems reforms have been partly induced by the dynamics of a rapidly changing
economic environment and by a succession of policy shocks during the 1990s (Melendez, 2004).
The federal government decided to make sweeping reforms in the governance of the public
training regime in response to changing economic conditions and recognition of the limitations
of the old system. Even before changes in the economy, the evidence was abundant that the
public training system, while making minimal improvements in the job and wage conditions for
some people, overall did not meet its objectives (Grubb et al., 1999; Harrison & Weiss 1998).
The long economic expansion of the 1990s created favorable labor market conditions for
the low-skilled, entry-lvl sgmnt of th markt, a rvrsal of th prvious dcad’s pattrn in
which the more educated workers benefited the most from economic growth. Consequently,
during the past decade employers in many industries have been more willing to experiment with
recruitment and training programs targeting the disadvantaged (Melendez, 2004). The most
recent wave of systems reforms began with the enactment and implementation of TANF and
WIA. Taken as a whole, these reforms promoted the principles of universal access, integration of
federal streams, devolution of policy to local authorities, and the philosophical primacy of work
experience (work first) as a starting point for employment services. WIA focused on outcomes
and performance-based management. As a result, many new programs were started by
nontraditional institutions, many of the traditional programs underwent a rapid transformation of
operations, and many others left the industry (Melendez, 2004).

48
Over time, many theories and bodies of knowledge have contributed to the fields of study
that support workforce development, including adult education, career and technical education,
and human resource development (Jacobs, 1990). These fields are based on the application of
knowledge from disciplines as diverse as psychology, economics, and systems theory.
Workforce development introduces the possibility of combining perspectives such that theory
development in one field can be integrated with theory development in another field, for the
eventual enrichment of both fields. Deriving theory from one field to other fields has the
potential to yield much new information, which would not be available otherwise. How to
encourage such scholarly exchanges within the context of workforce development is an issue of
critical importance (Jacobs & Hawley, 2009).
Programs to develop the working population vary significantly across higher education
institutions (presented in Table 1). Each type of institution caters to different needs, providing
valuable pathways for professional and career development. For example, those found at Ivy
League Universities provide advanced, flexible programs with strong industry ties and extensive
networking opportunities (e.g., President and Fellows of Harvard College, 2024). These
programs target Fortune 500 companies and other leading organizations and charge substantial
tuition consistent with the premium brand associated with their institutions. Workforce
development offered by non-Ivy League 4-year institutions tends to focus on practical, careerfocused programs with robust support services (e.g., University of Connecticut, 2024). These
programs are priced lower than Ivy League programs, yet still tend to focus on drawing corporate
audiences, whether the tuition is paid by employers or the trainees themselves. Meanwhile,
community colleges focus on vocational and technical training with an emphasis on immediate
job placement. Community college workforce development tends to be the most affordably

49
priced and target the local workforce (e.g., Massachusetts Association of Community Colleges,
2024).
Table 1
Comparative Analysis of Workforce Development Programs Across Types of Higher Education
Institutions
Program element Harvard and Ivy
Leagues
Non-Ivy League 4-
year institutions
Community colleges
Program Offerings Executive education,
professional courses,
online learning
Certification
programs, online
courses, continuing
education
Vocational training,
workforce
development, skills
certification
Curriculum Design Advanced, industryexpert designed,
flexible formats
Practical, industryrelevant, some
flexibility
Hands-on, practical,
focused on local
industry needs
Tuition Highest Midrange Lowest
Industry Partnerships Global Regional and national Local
Networking Extensive and
influential alumni
networks
Active but less
expansive alumni
networks
Regionally focused
networking
opportunities
Note. Original table created based on Executive Education, by President and Fellows of Harvard
College, 2024, https://www.exed.hbs.edu; “Non-Dgr and Visiting Studnt Srvics,” by
University of Connecticut, 2024, https://nondegree.uconn.edu/; “Workforc Training,” by
Massachusetts Association of Community Colleges, 2024, https://masscc.org/workforce-training/

50
Community College Involvement in Workforce Readiness
Community colleges serve as key institutions in the restructuring of local labor markets.
With a long history as sponsors of employment and training programs targeting both
disadvantaged populations and specific local industry needs, community colleges are well
positioned to occupy a central role as local and regional labor market intermediaries.
Uncertainties on their ability to take advantage of welfare reform to maintain or advance their
position as labor market intermediaries will depend on the ever-changing local policies
governing work requirements for TANF participants and the internal dynamics of the colleges
themselves. Community colleges responded effectively and creatively to the challenges posed to
them by welfare reform, and they have shown that they are capable of playing a major role in
regional labor markets. They have benefited from favorable state regulations regarding welfare
programs, but beyond that, the extent to which community colleges have responded successfully
to welfare reform initiatives at the local level has been determined largely by internal factors.
These factors include the college leaderships commitment to a comprehensive mission for the
college, the existence of programs and prior experiences serving the disadvantaged at the
college, favorable faculty and staff attitudes toward non degree programs, and a proactive
leadership promoting and articulating ongoing relations and collaborations with local labor,
businesses, industries, and social service agencies (Melendez et al., 2004).
According to Melendez et al. (2004), 80% of community colleges nationwide offer some
kind of TANF program. Most of these are spin offs of programs that existed prior to the
enactment of PRWORA, although a large proportion of the colleges surveyed designed
completely new programs to meet the stricter requirements of the WtW regulations. TANF
programs were designed to respond directly to policy regulations emphasizing job placement and

51
work experience. Almost all TANF programs that were surveyed offered short term training and
internships with employers. In general, Melendez et al. found that student outcomes from these
programs were comparable to outcomes for other training providers such as community-based
organizations operating under the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA). Administrators at
community colleges interviewed for the study estimate that two thirds of students complete the
programs in which they enroll and slightly more than three quarters find jobs in the areas in
which they train. However, nearly all of the programs (90.4%) also offer college preparatory
courses and most of the short-term training (71.2%) is articulated to degree programs, so that
academic work is conducive to one's long-term educational goals. This makes community
colleges important regional labor force intermediaries because they can train the unemployed for
entry level jobs and provide a steppingstone for academic and career advancement.
Public-Private Partnerships with Community Colleges and Workforce Readiness
The proposed understanding of workforce development raises the importance of
institutional collaborations (Jacobs & Hawley, 2009). Too often, private sector and public sector
programs have been planned and implemented without sufficient involvement of related
institutions, which has reduced the overall effectiveness of the programs. Many exemplary
examples of collaborations have emerged recently. Collaborations can now be observed by the
workforce development programs, such as job training and retraining, job placement, and postplacement services, conducted by Chambers of Commerce and individual businesses (Harrison
& Weiss, 1998; Hawley & Sommers, 2003). One study demonstrated that adult workforce
programs that engage in formal collaborations produce steeper earnings increases in training
participants than those that are trained in adult programs with informal collaborations (Hawley et
al., 2003).

52
Accordingly, new types of labor market intermediaries have emerged. These are based on
a broad range of institutions that differ markedly in scope and mission from the typical service
provider of years past. In comparison with the typical employment program of a decade ago, the
nw brd of intrmdiary is mor rsponsiv to mployrs’ dmands, has a broadr bas of
financial labor market intermediaries, and interacts or partners more often with other
organizations. A growing number of labor market intermediaries are focused on a specific
industry or sector within an industry, and their services target fewer aspects of the employment
service continuum.
With the inclusion of various partners, program planning also will require the
consideration of broader sets of goals (Jacobs & Hawley, 2009). Workforce development is a
programmatic response to a societal need and, thus, should not be limited in scope to a specific
organization or should be designed to benefit one set of individuals only. Rather, workforce
development seeks to bridge individual, organizational, and societal interests in ways that
meaningfully benefit each other. Second, professionals should select criteria for judging the
effectiveness of programs using both proximal and distal criteria. That is, the achievement of
immediate program goals – such as the number of graduates from a training program – is only
one way of determining program success. Long-term criteria should also be considered in terms
of the impact of the program downstream.
Educational professionals and policy makers working in various settings (e.g.,
organizations, agencies, schools) also have a role in planning workforce development programs,
keeping in mind that the programs should connect somehow with another level of related goals
(Jacobs & Hawley, 2009). For instance, government-sponsored dislocated worker programs
should logically have their own program goals and they should have explicitly stated societal

53
goals beyond the program goals, even though the societal goals cannot possibly be controlled to
the same extent as the program goals. Planning and accountability systems developed by the
California Employment and Training Panel shows off the benefits that come from engaging in
sustained planning for employer supported training that takes into account societal and individual
objectives as well as corporate goals (Regional Technology Strategies, 1999). Nevertheless,
reconciling different sets of goals is a defining feature of an integrated perspective of workforce
development.
The integrated perspective is necessary because most problems surrounding inadequately
trained labor pools have societal roots beyond organizations that could be addressed in a range of
social settings, other than organizations. Organizations such as community-based agencies and
educational institutions have critical roles in helping organizations meet skills shortages. The
New York-based Wildcat program, for instance, has trained entry level financial services
workers for a number of years, working both with business and social service organizations
(Schlefer, 1999). In the healthcare field, a business sector with one of the most obvious
shortages, non-profit providers and educational institutions have played substantial roles in
training entry level workers (Pindus & Nightingale, 1995). Jacobs and Hawley (2009) asserted,
as a result, siloed thinking among the various parties involved in workforce development needs
to be avoided, especially when the economic and social well-being of a community is at stake.
Everyday demands require that areas of practice become more blurred and less distinct, which is
desirable for achieving important a wider range of workforce development outcomes.
The realization that an integrated perspective regarding workforce development is needed
has implications for education. More often than not, programs of human resource development,
adult education, and career and technical education have been placed together for the sake of

54
administrative convenience. Unfortunately, when these programs actually come together, it
becomes apparent that they have as many areas of difference as areas of commonality. The
question of concern becomes identifying the underlying theme that ties them together.
Workforce development represents a programmatic core that might provide a unifying theme for
graduate study, since it seeks not to limit the influence of any one field of study. Instead, it
recognizes the equal importance of the fields in contributing to broader societal goals. Having
each field maintain its academic strength is the essence for achieving workforce development
goals.
One of the most significant developments in the employment services industry today is
the evolution of traditional service providers into a new type of labor market intermediary that
simultaneously focuses on both the needs of job seekers and those of employers (Melendez,
2004). These are based on a broad range of institutions that differ markedly in scope and mission
from the typical service provider of years past. In comparison with the typical employment
program of a dcad ago, th nw brd of intrmdiary is mor rsponsiv to mployrs’
demands, has a broader base of financial support, and interacts or partners more often with other
organizations. A growing number of labor market intermediaries are focused on a specific
industry or sector within an industry, and their services target fewer aspects of the employment
service continuum. The new labor market intermediaries have achieved a fundamental
transformation of their services, which were previously oriented towards the provision of
employment services to job seekers and the expense of responding to the needs of employers.
While many institutions offer employment services, the participation of CBOs has been a
defining element in the majority of successful initiatives. Community organizations are a critical
component of an integrated approach to economic and social development. One of the most

55
defining characteristics of the new type of labor market intermediary is its emphasis on
partnerships, networking, and collaborations as a mechanism to leverage resources in a highly
competitive environment (Melendez, 2004).
Community College Faculty Members’ Role in Workforce Development-Oriented PublicPrivate Partnerships
Community college faculty members play a central role in a private-public partnership.
Specifically, the community college receives federal funding to provide services to industry,
specifically for the training of employees. Having formed relationships with business and
industry partners, community colleges, in turn, provide targeted training and education programs
that are population specific. Factors such as federal funding, close relationships with industry,
and knowledge of industry curricula combine with regional access to underserved populations to
make the community college a one-stop center for the delivery of education and training to a
population of unskilled laborers. A recursive process of needs assessment, collaboration,
planning, follow-through, and evaluation helps community colleges attune to changing needs
among industry and workers. Faculty participation is a recursive process that assures ongoing
assessment of need, planning, and implementation. Whereas the current trend is toward
quantitative evaluation only, research and program theory-based evaluation support the need for
qualitative research that investigates barriers, gaps, and needs.
Insights about faculty mmbrs’ prspctivs and involvmnt in th PPPs may b gaind
from th prsnt study’s thortical framwork, which consists of Vroom’s (1964) xpctancy
theory and the theory of extra-role behavior (Van Dyne et al., 1995). Vroom (1964) asserted that
employee behavior results from their conscious choices. Vroom further argued that employees
choose the behaviors that maximize their enjoyment while minimizing their effort and

56
discomfort. As a rsult, Vroom (1994) assrtd that an mploy’s motivational force, meaning
the effort they dedicate toward a certain task, is the product of expectancy, instrumentality, and
valence. These variables are defined as follows:
1. Expectancy: the outcome employees expect from their effort, whether they anticipate
being able to achieve good performance, and how much difficulty they expect to
encounter along the way (goal difficulty). Vroom argued that organizations can boost
mploys’ task motivation by providing th rsourcs (.g., knowldg, skills
training, xprt support, tools) that nhanc mploys’ xpctations of satisfactory
performance and reduce their expectations of difficulty that threaten performance.
2. Instrumntality: th mploy’s blif that satisfactory prformanc of th task will
lead to a reward (e.g., compensation, recognition, promotion, sense of achievement).
Vroom (1964) argud that organizations can nhanc mploys’ task motivation by
associating rewards with task performance, making clear what the rewards are and
under what conditions they would be awarded, and delivering on the rewards as
promised.
3. Valence: the value employees assign to the anticipated reward. Employees desire
different outcomes; therefore, it is important to understand what rewards motivate the
employees whose performance is needed and then to associate these valued rewards
with successful task performance.
Van Dyne et al. (1995) outlined the theory of extra-role behaviors. An extra-role behavior
is an action whos aim is to “bnfit th organization and that gos beyond existing role
expectations" (Organ et al., 2006, p. 33). Ryan and Dunn-Jenson (2016) pointed out that faculty
members in higher education characteristically take on demands that fall outside their teaching

57
job. They speculated that faculty members engage in extra-role behaviors for several reasons,
such as difficulty in clearly distinguishing in-role from extra-role obligations due to implicit
expectations and cultural norms, personal and professional convictions, and lack of clarity about
contractual requirements.
For example, the expectation that faculty members provide service to the university (and
ambiguity about what constitutes such service) leads to significant confusion (Ryan & DunnJensen, 2016). Faculty members may serve their department, school, university, or larger
community in a wide variety of ways, such as sponsoring student organizations, participating in
committees, attending university events as a department representative, promoting the
department at recruiting events, meeting with potential students or faculty members. It is difficult
to gaug th quantity and quality of faculty mmbrs’ srvic activitis; thrfor, it is difficult
to determine when the service requirement has been fulfilled. Accordingly, faculty members may
perform excess levels of service (i.e., extra-role behaviors) to make sure they have satisfied their
contractual obligations.
Confusion about service and extra-role behaviors tend to be particularly rampant among
nontenure track faculty and those faculty members with less secure employment (Feather &
Rauter, 2004). Feather and Rauter (2004) explained that these faculty members engage in extra
srvic as mans to improv thir lgitimacy and status in th dpartmnt, strngthn othrs’
perceptions that they are providing value, and increase the chances of receiving desired outcomes
(.g., rnwing thir mploymnt contract). In turn, ths faculty mmbrs’ habitual prformanc
of extra-role behaviors can elevate cultural expectations regarding service within their
departments and colleges, thus, exerting pressure on other organization members to similarly

58
engage in extra-role behaviors and imposing consequences if they do not do as such (Van Dyne
& Ellis, 2004; Vigoda-Gadot, 2007).
Another factor influencing extra-role behaviors is that faculty member perceptions about
what is required as part of the job vary (Ryan & Dunn-Jensen, 2016). Therefore, faculty
members who perceive their job responsibilities spanning a rather broad scope are more likely to
demonstrate extra-role behavior, even when they are aware these are not contractually required.
The theory of extra-role behavior, along with expectancy theory, informed the conceptual
framework guiding the present study.
Career and Technical Education
CTE programs in community colleges serve an important niche within higher education
and plays a fundamental part of workforce development. These programs are designed to equip
students with the skills and knowledge they need for gainful employment. Enrollment in CTE
programs at community colleges has been rising steadily. According to the National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES, 2022), approximately 30% of all community college students are
enrolled in CTE programs. Community colleges saw a 10% increase in CTE enrollments over
the past five years, with healthcare and information technology being the most popular fields.
Reports indicate that 40% of all CTE students are part-time, balancing education with
employment (American Association of Community Colleges [AACC], 2021). CTE programs
attract a diverse student body, including a significant proportion of non-traditional students, such
as working adults, minorities, and first-generation college students. Enrollment statistics vary by
region, with higher enrollment rates in areas with strong manufacturing and healthcare sectors,
such as the Midwest and South (NCES Report, 2022).

59
CTE programs often use a modular approach, allowing students to earn certifications
incrementally, and these can be stacked towards a degree (AACC, 2021). Curricula for CTE
programs are designed in collaboration with industry partners to ensure relevance and alignment
with current job market needs. This includes input from advisory boards consisting of local
business leaders and employers. Programs emphasize practical, hands-on learning experiences,
including lab work, simulations, and internships. These programs serve important roles in
bridging skill gaps in the economy.
Since the COVID-19 pandemic, online and hybrid learning models have become
increasingly common in CTE programs, which makes education more accessible to all students
(NCES, 2022). Additionally, AI, machine learning, and other emerging technologies are being
incorporated into CTE programs—particularly in fields IT and advanced manufacturing.
Sustainability also is a growing focus within CTE programs.
Key challenges to the success of CTE programs include the limited budgets community
colleges typically deal with, as these can limit the number and extent of the CTE offerings with a
given institution (Luaces et al., 2018). Resource constraints exacerbate another challenge facing
community college CTE programs, which is the difficulty of keeping course curricula and
methods aligned with industry changes—particularly as technology advances at an everincreasing pace. Finally, perceptions that CTE programs lack the credibility of traditional fouryear degrees can further depress enrollment.
Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework is a graphical depiction of the core concepts underlying a
study and how they relate to one another within the theoretical framework (Luse, Mennecke, &
Townsnd, 2012). Drawing from th study’s thortical framwork and th xtant litratur, th

60
natur of a community collg faculty mmbr’s involvmnt in a workforce developmentoriented PPP is the result of three interacting sets of forces concerning the organization, social
setting, and individual faculty member (see Figure 1).
Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

61
Organizational factors concern the contractual requirements of the position, which
influences whether the faculty member believes their involvement in PPPs falls within or outside
their employment contract (Organ et al., 2006; Ryan & Dunn-Jensen, 2016). Organizational
factors align with the present study’s Rsarch Qustion 1: What ar faculty prspctivs
regarding their participation in workforce development-oriented PPPs relative to their role and
contract within the college?
Social setting factors concern whether participation in PPPs is expected within the culture
of th faculty mmbr’s dpartmnt or institution, which can rsult in pr prssur (or an
absence of peer pressure) to participate (Feather & Rauter, 2004; Ryan & Dunn-Jensen, 2016;
Van Dyne & Ellis, 2004; Vigoda-Gadot, 2007). Similarly, a faculty mmbr’s anxity about
being evaluated poorly by peers in the organization, whether formally or informally, can affect
their choice of involvement (Feather & Rauter, 2004). In the same way, concerns about their
reputation and status among their faculty peers can influence their choice to participate. Insights
gaind by xamining faculty mmbrs’ social stting factors hlp answr th prsnt study’s
Research Question 2 (What motivates faculty members to participate in workforce developmentoriented PPPs) and Research Question 3 (What factors demotivate or obstruct faculty members
from participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs).
Prsonal factors affcting faculty mmbrs’ dcisions includ thir prcption of thir
role as a faculty member (i.e., whether participation in a PPP is within their role, regardless of
whether it is specified in their employment contract; Organ et al., 2006). Furthermore, faculty
mmbrs’ prcptions of thir potntial for succss, th intrinsic and xtrinsic rewards associated
with their involvement and success, and the values of those rewards also will influence their
dcisions to participat (Vroom, 1964). Insights gaind by xamining faculty mmbrs’ prsonal

62
factors help answer each of the present study’s rsarch qustions: What ar faculty prspctivs
regarding their participation in workforce development-oriented PPPs relative to their role and
contract within the college, what motivates faculty members to participate in workforce
development-oriented PPPs, and what factors demotivate or obstruct faculty members from
participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs?

63
Chapter Three: Methodology
The purpose of this study was to examine community college faculty perspectives
regarding participating in workforce development-oriented public-private partnerships PPPs.
This chapter outlines the research methods used to conduct the present study. First, the research
questions are reiterated, an overview of the design is provided, and the research setting is
described. My positionality as the researcher also is acknowledged. The data sources for this
study are outlined, and the procedures related to participant recruitment, instrumentation, and
data collection and analysis are described. Approaches to improv th study’s crdibility and
trustworthiness are reviewed and the procedures to uphold the ethics of research were identified.
Th study’s limitations and dlimitations also ar acknowldgd.
Research Questions
1. What are faculty perspectives regarding their participation in workforce developmentoriented PPPs relative to their role and contract within the college?
2. What motivates faculty members to participate in workforce development-oriented PPPs?
3. What factors demotivate or obstruct faculty members from participating in workforce
development-oriented PPPs?
Overview of Design
The present study utilized a qualitative design. Qualitative research applies inductive
thinking to describe and interpret issues from the perspective of the individual informant
(Creswell & Creswell, 2022). Based on the collection of data in various formats, the researcher
compiles a comprehensive account of the problem under investigation. Advantages of a
qualitative design include flexibility and the capacity to delve deeply into a problem, cultivate a
rich description of phenomena, and incorporate the human experience (Rahman, 2017). For

64
example, the emergent design typical of qualitative studies enables the researcher to capture the
nuancs of informants’ xprinc. The inability to identify causes and effects and the absence of
statistical data validation are two limitations of a qualitative research design. Additionally, data
collection and analysis typically consume substantial time. Data generalizability also decreases
due to the smaller sample size, giving the impression that the findings are less trustworthy
(Rahman, 2017). A qualitative research design was appropriate for this study because the aim of
th rsarch was to undrstand faculty mmbrs’ prcptions and prcivd motivators and
obstacles to participating in PPPs. The lack of extant research on this topic also indicated the
suitability of a qualitative approach (Creswell & Creswell, 2022).
Specific qualitative designs vary. Creswell and Creswell (2019) noted options such as
grounded theory, ethnography, narrative, case study, and phenomenological research, although
many more designs exist. The present research utilized a case study design (Yin, 2018).
Qualitative case study research examines real-world entities (e.g., individuals, groups,
organizations, or systems), and case study research may focus on one case (single case study) or
two or more cases (multiple case study; Creswell & Creswell, 2022; Gay et al., 2012). Common
across case study designs in the collection and in-depth examination of the bounded system or
systems (Creswell & Creswell, 2022). Therefore, a case study can be appropriate when a
thorough understanding of the case or cases under study is desired, a complex and rich data set
will be gathered, or when few cases are available for investigation (Creswell & Poth, 2018).
The present study utilized a single case study, where the case was a single community
college located in the western United States. Single case studies allow the researcher to cultivate
in-depth knowledge of the bounded subject (Yin, 2011). Multiple informants from the single
case were recruited, and data were collected from the informants using semi-structured

65
interviews. The use of multiple informants allows for data triangulation and improved construct
validity (Yin, 2011). Although examination of a single case may reduce the transferability of
study findings, rich description of the case and its informants controlled for this limitation.
Furthermore, the intention of case study research is generalization to theory rather than to other
settings (Yin, 2011).
Beyond choices of single versus multiple case study designs, this type of research also
may be conceptualized as exploratory, explanatory, or descriptive (Yin, 2018). These designs
diffr as outlind in Tabl 2. Du to th lack of prliminary rsarch lack of faculty mmbrs’
perceptions related to participating in PPPs, the present study was performed as an exploratory
single case study. Descriptive and explanatory studies were not possible for the present study, as
the lack of extant research precluded the development of a descriptive theory of the phenomena
or identification of variables and hypotheses to test. Findings from the present study may inform
future descriptive and explanatory case studies that would more deeply explore specific
mechanisms or tactics used by college administrators and workforce development program
coordinators to encourage faculty member participation.

66
Table 2
Types of Case Study Designs
Design Timing Preconditions Outcome
Exploratory Early
stage
Lack of detailed
preliminary research
Identify research questions and
hypotheses for further investigation
Descriptive Middle
stage
Extant research that
provides descriptive theory
of the phenomena
In-depth descriptions and abstract
interpretations of data, leading to
further development of theory related
to the phenomenon
Explanatory Later
stage
Extensive extant research
that identifies variables and
hypothesis to examine
Explanation of causal relationships and
develop theory related to the topic
being investigated
Adapted from Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods (6th ed.), by R. K.
Yin, 2018, Sage. Copyright 2018 by Sage.
Informants in the present case study were faculty members recruited using a combination
of criterion and snowball sampling methods. The manner of collecting data to answer the
research questions involved participant interviews. Interview questions were designed to
undrstand th faculty mmbrs’ prcptions and prcivd motivators and obstacles regarding
participation in PPPs. The researcher collected and analyzed the data to arrive at an in-depth
undrstanding of faculty mmbrs’ prcptions and participation in workforc dvlopmntoriented PPPs within a community college.
Positionality
My connection to this study as the researcher was central to this problem. As Vice
President of Economic and Workforce Development at Pasadena City College and the context of
this study, my goal is to create an open interface between employers and a trained workforce,
expediting demand and curating it to influence the supply of student participants. My
positionality with respect to this problem relates to some of my identities: being female, first

67
generation, product of immigrant parents, and an administrator. Some of these identities allow
me to understand the problem. My identities as a first-generation product of immigrant parents
offered me some perspective on middle class workers, education, work ethics, and social
mobility. Being an administrator allowed me to understand workforce education, workforce data,
industry needs and building and preparing the new talent pipeline. It also allowed me to have
direct contact with faculty, their curriculum, the advisory meetings and their professional
development trainings.
Another of my identities, that of small business owner, contributed to some difficulties
with the study. I had an expectation level for the institution and the faculty specifically as it
related to the delivery of instruction, engaging with employers and being agile to the needs of
our business community. Through the lens of the small business owner, I understand the many
challenges employers face building their workforce. This includes hiring people with the right
skills, upgrading skills of current employees as skill needs change, and ensuring all staff have socalled 21st century skills such as creative thinking, communication, teamwork, time management,
and problem solving (Urban Institute, 2018),
To best identify and control my biases, I recorded personal notes or memos (Creswell &
Creswell, 2022) as I conducted my research to reflect on my experiences and their impact on my
data. In addition, I avoided using any of my network connections for a truer read on the study.
Leveraging existing networks might have compromised my data in terms of what and how much
is disclosed. Finally, I needed to suspend judgment, demonstrate respect for participants, and be
sensitive to the work experiences participants share (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

68
Data Sources
Th intntion of rsarch convrsations is to gathr “dirct quotations from popl about
thir xprincs, opinions, flings, and knowldg” (Patton, 2015, p. 14). Compard to othr
approaches, interviews allow researchers to gather retrospective information, which is helpful
when the examined phenomenon occurred before the study period (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Interviews also allowed for the examination of phenomena that cannot be readily observed, such
as participants’ thoughts, feelings, and motivations, as in the case of the present study. According
to Qu and Dumay (2011), research interviews are particularly effective for gathering information
on participants’ xprincs, flings, and opinions from thir prspctiv, in thir own words,
and how they think and use language. Through these mechanisms, research interviews allow for
the creation of richly descriptive (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) and holistic examinations (Creswell
& Creswell, 2022) of the topic being examined.
Interviewing is a popular approach for data collection in qualitative research (Qu &
Dumay, 2011). Although interviews can be structured, semi-structured, or unstructured, the most
commonly used type of interview is the semi-structured approach (Rowley, 2012), which allows
the research a blend of guidance (i.e., specific topics to explore) and flexibility to adjust the flow
and wording of qustions to fit ach participant’s uniqu account (Qu & Dumay, 2011). In this
way, semi-structured interviews allow for the disclosur of “important and oftn hiddn facts of
human and organizational bhavior” (Qu & Dumay, 2011, p. 246).
Research interviewing does pose some disadvantages. First, because interviews take
longer to conduct than quantitative questionnaires (Rowley, 2012), sample sizes tend to be rather
small, underscoring the criticality of sound selection practices. Power differences also can
emerge between researcher and participant (Qu & Dumay, 2011), which can lead to biases that

69
affect the results. Researchers can reduce the impact of these limitations by building rapport,
maintaining the flow of communication, and avoiding their own biases.
The researcher is central to the design and delivery of a qualitative research interview
(Creswell & Creswell, 2022). Specifically, researchers need to possess a depth of knowledge of
the topic so they may ask relevant questions (Qu & Dumay, 2011). At the same time, question
development for interviews requires less a priori knowledge than does creating a
psychometrically valid questionnaire (Rowley, 2012). In order to conduct research interviews, an
interviewer must be able to maintain the flow of the conversation with participants, maintain
confidentiality, establish rapport, and avoid bias (Qu & Dumay, 2011). The researcher must
exercise reflexivity in order to avoid interview bias, as well as acknowledge and disclose the
ways in which data interpretation is subjective rather than objective (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). The
researcher also needs to engage in inductive reasoning and to be able to group data into themes.
Interviewing was selected for the present study because it allowed for the collection and
analysis of participants' thoughts, opinions, and feelings in their own words and provided a rich
description and comprehensive account of the problem concerning low faculty participation in
PPPs. Spcifically, intrviws provid accss to information about faculty mmbrs’ prcptions
and particular sources of motivation and reluctance to participate in PPPs—insights that would
have been difficult for me to observe directly. The interview's nature also allowed me to probe
dply into participants’ viwpoints and provid th flxibility of a convrsational format to
immediately probe for additional insights and clarification as needed.
Participants
Participant procedures relate to all the details involved in locating and recruiting
participants. Such topics include sampling size, sampling criteria, sampling strategy, and the

70
step-by-step selection procedures used to find and enroll participants. These aspects of the
present study are described in the following sections.
Sample Size
Sample size decisions in a qualitative study depend upon the study design and nature of
the research purpose and associated questions (Miles et al., 2019). Central to qualitative
sampling is gnrating rich data that improvs th study’s non-statistical generalizability (Miles
et al., 2019). The guideline for sufficiency in qualitative sampling is achieving data saturation or
redundancy, meaning that despite additional interviews being conducted, no new information is
emerging and patterns in the responses are repeating (Creswell & Creswell, 2022; Merriam &
Tisdale, 2013; Patton, 2015).
Qualitativ rsarchrs could us Brinkmann and Kval’s (2019) guidline of 5–25
participants as a starting point; however, per Merriam and Tisdale (2016), any initial ideas about
sample size should be considered an estimate that should be confirmed as data are gathered. Data
analysis should proceed concurrently with data analysis so the researcher can detect when
redundancy is reached and this phase of recruitment, collection, and analysis can be concluded.
The sample size in the present study was nine informants.
Selection Criteria
Participants in this study were required to satisfy three selection criteria:
1. Participant needed to be employed as an adjunct or full-time faculty member at the
study setting. This criterion was necessary because only faculty member perceptions within the
study setting were being solicited in this study.

71
2. Participant ndd to b a dsignatd faculty mmbr within th institution’s carr
and technical education programs. This criterion was necessary because the faculty within these
programs were needed to participate in workforce development-oriented PPPs.
3. Participant needed to have worked a minimum of 6 months working at the study
setting. This criterion was established to reduce the chance that the faculty member was focused
only getting used to the setting or the position.
Exclusion criteria were as follows:
1. The participant was intending to retire or leave the study setting within a year. It was
anticipated that participants intending to leave would be less likely than others to want to
participate in PPPs.
2. The participant was unwilling to complete an interview about their perceptions
regarding PPPs.
3. The participant was unavailable during the study period.
Sampling Strategy
Sampling strategies are designed to help the researcher ethically and efficiently recruit
participants who can provide rich information that is true-to-life and relevant to the study
purpose (Curtis et al., 2000). Designing and implementing a sampling strategy begins with
identifying the general, target, and accessible populations relevant to the study and accessible to
the researcher (Asiamah, 2017).
The general population refers to the largest possible group of participants: in this study,
community college faculty members. The target population is a refinement to this, including only
participants who do not hav any attributs that violat th study’s goals and who ar abl to
describe their opinions and experiences clearly and with adequate detail. In this case, the target

72
population consists of community college faculty members in career and technical education
programs who have been employed at the study setting for at least 6 months. The final stage of
refinement produces the accessible population, which removes those unable or unwilling to
participat during th priod of data collction. Th study’s accssible population is the basis for
sampling (Asiamah, 2017).
This study used a purposeful sampling approach of criterion, snowball, and convenience
sampling strategies to identify and recruit information-rich cases to include in the study.
Criterion sampling ensures that participants qualify by having certain required characteristics
(Miles et al., 2019). Snowball sampling means asking qualifying participants to suggest other
participants. Convenience sampling refers to soliciting participants from the researchr’s
personal and professional networks. These three approaches significantly increase the efficiency
of recruiting and are frequently used approaches (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). It should be
acknowledged, however, that snowball and convenience approaches tend to limit the range of
perspectives reflected in the sample (referred to as sampling bias), given the tendency for
homophily in social networks (McPherson et al., 2001). Snowball sampling also can increase the
risk of confidentiality breach if informants disclose to each other that they participated in the
study or share the contents of their conversation.
Selection Procedures
As the primary investigator, I emailed all career and technical education faculty at the
study setting to find potential study participants (presented in Appendix A). The email described
the study, solicited their participation, and asked them to forward the invitation to others. Study
candidates who contacted me were screened using the inclusion and exclusion criteria and any
candidate questions or concerns were addressed. I reviewed the information sheet for exempt

73
studies with candidates who passed the criteria and scheduled them for an interview date and
time. I emailed the candidate a study-specific information sheet for exempt studies (Appendix B)
and asked them to review before the interview.
Instrumentation
The instrumentation for the present study consisted of a 21-item semi-structured
interview script I created for this study (Appendix C). Semi-structured interviews can consist of
a mixture of closed- and open-ended questions that the researcher presents in a flexible order that
promotes a dynamic research conversation (Merriam & Tisdale, 2016). The questions that
comprise the script are created around themes of interest that align with the study purpose,
research questions, theoretical framework, and conceptual framework (Rowley, 2012). Question
prompts and follow-up probing questions were used on an as-needed basis to facilitate the
collection of rich participant accounts. Interview questions also may be guided by the
rsarchr’s positionality (Mrriam & Tisdal, 2016) and xprtis dsigning and conducting
research interviews (Rowley, 2012). Per Qu and Dumay (2011), the structure of the script began
with an opening orientation followed by introductory questions that allowed the researcher and
participant to get acquainted and build a sense of psychological safety and rapport (Qu &
Dumay, 2011). Following the core questions that inquired about the topics being examined, cooldown questions helped the researcher and participant reach a sense of closure and completeness
with the conversation.
Before conducting the study, it was important to solicit expert reviews of the script and to
perform pilot interviews using the script. These steps helped assure that the questions were clear,
ordered in a way to promote in-depth discussion, and effective for gathering the desired data
(Rowley, 2012; Yeong et al., 2018). In turn, these steps helped enhance the soundness of the

74
interview tool. Following the expert review and pilot interviews, I adjusted the question wording,
sequencing, and timing to optimize the tool (Farooq & de Villiers, 2017).
The interview script to be used in the present study contained 21 questions designed to
examine several concepts related to extra-role behavior and expectancy theory. Alignment of the
interview questions to the research questions and the conceptual framework is outlined in
Appendix D.
Data Collection Procedures
Data collection procedures for the present study involved participant interviews.
Interview duration was 45-60 minutes. Interviews were conducted one-on-one via Zoom
confrncing softwar. Pnding ach participant’s prmission, ach intrviw was audio and
video recorded. This manner of data collection was chosen because participants were not
physically present on campus at the same time as I was. Therefore, this approach optimized
participants’ as and convninc. Study participants wr xpctd to b familiar with this
technology because all had delivered courses virtually during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data
were collected via video and audio recording within Zoom software. Transcriptions for the
interview were produced using otter.ai. I took additional notes as needed to aid me in following
conversation, capturing nonverbal information, and recording my comments.
Data Analysis Procedures
Data analysis is the process of turning raw data into results. In qualitative research,
results typically are presented as descriptions of the data and themes that have emerged across
the participants (Creswell & Creswell, 2022). Themes were determined by examining the
verbatim interview transcripts supplemented by researcher notes (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

75
Data analysis occurred concurrently with data collection so I could determine when saturation
was achieved.
Data in the present study were examined using a process of thematic analysis based on
Brinkmann and Kvale (2019), Braun and Clarke (2006), and Miles et al. (2019). Thematic
analysis is described as a flexible approach for identifying patterns in the data and formulating
rich dscriptions and intrprtations of th data to answr th study’s rsarch qustions (Braun
& Clarke, 2006). The following steps were used:
1. In order to acquire an understanding of the nature, breadth, and depth of the interviews,
I read each interview transcript multiple times.
2. Th participant’s rspons to ach qustion was xamind lin by lin and maning
units were extracted. A meaning unit can be a few words, a phrase, a sentence, or an entire
paragraph. The distinguishing characteristic of a meaning unit is that the group of words
communicates a central idea (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Miles et al., 2019).
3. Each meaning unit was assigned a descriptive code that conveyed its central meaning
(Miles et al., 2019). Simultaneous descriptive coding was used, meaning that more than one
descriptive code was assigned to a meaning unit if it conveyed more than one central idea. A
priori codes used in this study were informed by the conceptual framework. Macro-level codes
includd “organizational factors,” “social stting factors,” and “prsonal factors.” Micro-level
cods includd “contractual rquirmnts,” “valuation anxity,” "cultural xpctations,”
"anticipatd rwards,” “anticipatd achivmnt,” “natur of involvmnt,” “rputation and
status,” “prcption of th rol,” and “valu of anticipatd rwards.”

76
4. When coding was complete, the data were rearranged by code. The codes and
associated data were reviewed to confirm th appropriatnss of cod’s wording. Cods wr
rewritten, combined, or expanded as needed.
5. The complete set of codes were examined, and similar codes either were collapsed into
one code or grouped under a supraordinate code.
6. Coding progressed cumulatively—that is, after the first interview, the transcript was
analyzed. After the second interview, the second transcript was analyzed and the results of the
analysis were combined with the results of the first, thus, allowing me to detect when no new
themes were emerging and data saturation had been attained (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
7. Upon completion of data collection and analysis, three transcripts were randomly
selected and submitted to a second rater trained in doctoral-level qualitative research. The second
rater analyzed the three transcripts using the analysis procedure outlined in this section. Upon
compltion, th scond ratr’s and th rsarchr’s rsults wr compard. In cass whr
differences between the analyses emerged, the researcher and the second coder discussed and
agreed upon how the results were revised. Any changes to the themes were carried throughout
the rest of the data set. The aim of this step was to achieve at least 80% interrater agreement.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Qualitative research is evaluated according to aims of credibility, transferability, and
confirmability (Onwuegbuzie, & Leech, 2007; Smith, 2007). Credibility indicates how
believable or trustworthy the findings are. Credibility can be enhanced by soliciting richly
described data from participants. The present study used semi-structured interviews with prompts
and probing questions as needed to create rich research conversations. Triangulation, achieved

77
by aggregating the data and detecting themes and patterns across participants further increases
credibility.
Transferability refers to the ability to transfer the findings gained from the study to other
settings (Onwuegbuzie, & Leech, 2007). Transferability was enhanced by providing a rich
description of the study setting and informants. Providing these details enabled other researchers
and readers to understand the possible applications of the present study findings.
Confirmability refers to the whether the findings determined by the researcher matches
what other researchers would conclude based on the same data set (Smith, 2007). Confirmability
was nhancd in th prsnt study by submitting th rsults of th rsarchr’s data analysis to a
doctoral-level second rater trained in qualitative research. In the event of discrepant results, the
findings in question were discussed and resolved until at least 80% interrater agreement was
reached.
In qualitativ rsarch, rliability rfrs in trms of th consistncy of th study’s procss
and outcomes such as raw data, results of data reduction and process notes (Campbell, 1996;
Hoepfl, 1997; Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Patton, 2014; Seale, 1999). Reliability was achieved in the
present study by carefully documenting the methods and adhering to these procedures when
conducting the study. Changes to the intended method were recorded so that the final dissertation
accurately reflected the research process used in this study.
Ethics
Th Univrsity of Southrn California’s Institutional Rviw Board (IRB) providd
oversight for the present study. Each participant was required to review the information sheet for
exempt studies provided via email (Appendix B) before completing an interview. I reviewed the
form with each participant and answer any questions or concerns they have. Participants were

78
informed that their involvement in the study was entirely voluntary and that they could decline
any question or withdraw at any time.
Possible risks for study participants included inconvenience because the study required
their time and possible emotional discomfort as they reflect on their experiences or involvement
in PPPs. These risks were reduced using the consent procedures and adherence to the interview
timing and protocol. Psychological risk was possible if participants reflected negatively on their
perceptions and experiences related to workforce development-oriented PPPs. Risk of
confidentiality breach was possible but was mitigated by informing participants that they should
not discuss their participation in the study or contents of the interview with others. Any
mploymnt risk or concrns wr mitigatd by didntifying participants’ nams and
information provided.
Although the interviews were audio- and video-recorded, these recordings were
permanently deleted immediately upon the researcher confirming the accuracy of the transcript.
The transcripts were deidentified by replacing all personal identifiers, including names, job titles,
and other identifying information with fake names. The raw data were stored in a passwordprotectd fil on th rsarchr’s prsonal and password-protected computer. Except when in
us, th computr rmaind in th rsarchr’s hom in a lockd drawr accssibl only to hr.
Signed consent forms were password-protctd and stord on th rsarchr’s personal computer
in files separate from the data. Data and consent form electronic files will be kept for 3 years and
then permanently destroyed.
Limitations and Delimitations
Assssing and nhancing a rsarch projct’s crdibility and trustworthinss requires
acknowledgment of its limitations and delimitations. Limitations in research refer to the study's

79
weaknesses as well as other issues that were not anticipated, were not inherent in the design,
occurred outside of the researcher's control, and affected the research's findings (Theofanidis &
Fountouki, 2018). One limitation affecting this study was the lack of extant research about
community college faculty perceptions of PPPs. If past research was available, the research
could have been more focused to investigate specific challenges and approaches for increasing
faculty mmbrs’ involvmnt in workforc dvlopmnt-oriented PPPs.
Another limitation that may have occurred is various types of participant bias due to the
study’s rlianc on slf-reported data (Creswell & Creswell, 2022). One such limitation was
hypothesis guessing, where participants attempt to voice the so-called correct response rather
than the response that reflects their true-to-life reality. Participants also may have been tempted
to answer in a socially desirable manner so as to present themselves as best as possible. These
biases may be particularly relevant to the present study, as the researcher is a community college
administrator, and the participants may have been consciously or subconsciously motivated to
demonstrate they were serving their institution. Researcher bias also was possible in this study
where my experiences trying to arrange workforce development-oriented PPPs and solicit faculty
mmbrs’ involvmnt may hav consciously or subconsciously primed my data collection and
analysis. Ths limitations wr controlld for by acknowldging th rsarchr’s positionality,
piloting the interview and auditing the research method to identify and reduce the influence of
bias, and subjecting the analysis to review by a doctoral level researcher who is not a community
college administrator or faculty member (Miles et al., 2019).
Delimitations concern features of the research design that restrict the scope of the study
and, as a result, influence the final results (Theofanidis & Fountouki, 2018). The present study's
primary delimitation was that it focused on one community college in the Western United States.

80
This limited the transferability of the findings to other community college settings. The
researcher provided rich description of the institution and departments represented as well as a
thorough description of the methodology used to reduce the impact of this delimitation and
provide readers with enough information to gauge the applicability of any study findings to their
own environments.
Relying on convenience and snowball sampling for participant recruitment were two
additional study delimitations that may have produced sampling bias that produced premature
data saturation (Creswell & Creswell, 2022). Using other sampling strategies could have drawn a
more diverse sample that produced more diversity in the results. A final delimitation affecting
the study was the use of only six informants from the study setting. Use of a small sample
reduces the range and amount of the data.
Summary
The purpose of this exploratory qualitative case study was to examine community college
faculty mmbrs’ prspctivs rgarding participating in workforc dvlopmnt-oriented
public-private partnerships PPPs. This chapter described the research methods that were used to
conduct the study. Nine faculty members who teach career and technical education at the study
setting were recruited. Each participant completed a 45- to 60-minute videoconference interview,
wherein they were asked about their perceptions as well as their perceived sources of motivation
and resistance relative to participating in PPPs. The data were examined using thematic analysis
as described by Braun and Clarke (2006), guided by the study theoretical framework informed
by expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964) and extra-role behavior theory (Van Dyne et al., 1995).

81
Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this study was to examine community college faculty perspectives
regarding participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs. This chapter reports the
findings of this study. Key themes are reported by research question.
Research Questions
Three research questions were examined in the present study:
1. What are faculty perspectives regarding their participation in workforce developmentoriented PPPs relative to their role and contract within the college?
2. What motivates faculty members to participate in workforce development-oriented
PPPs?
3. What factors demotivate or obstruct faculty members from participating in workforce
development-oriented PPPs?
The following sections report the study findings. Themes are reported organized by
research question. A theme was considered any concept mentioned by at least 20% of the sample
(n = 2). The chapter closes with a summary.
Participant Demographics
Nine participants (four male, five female) were interviewed for this study (presented
inTable 3). The individuals spanned a range of departments, including accounting, culinary arts,
business, automotive, machine shop technology, legal, extension, distance education,
communication, and guided pathways. Participants had 1–33 years of teaching experience (M =
13.22, SD = 10.91), 1–29 years of teaching experience at the study setting (M = 8.67, SD = 8.20),
and 5–38 years of industry experience (M = 15.50, SD = 10.60).

82
Table 3
Participants
Pseudonym Area Discipline Status Time at institution
Anne CTE Business Full-time 7 years
Brenda CTE Media Full-time 4 years
Brian CTE Pre-law Full-time 29 years
Chuck CTE Business Full-time 7 years
Frank CTE Machine shop
technology
Full-time 7 years
George CTE Automotive Full-time 7 years
Jamie CTE Culinary arts Full-time 4 years
Michelle CTE Business Full-time 12 years
Simon CTE Culinary arts Full-time 1 year
Research Question 1: What Are Faculty Perspectives Regarding Their Participation in
Workforce Development-Oriented PPPs Relative to Their Role and Contract Within the
College?
Research Question 1 asked: What are faculty perspectives regarding their participation in
workforce development-oriented PPPs relative to their role and contract within the college? Four
thms mrgd from participants’ rsponss concrning what ths partnrships involvd and
whether facilitating these partnerships fll insid or outsid faculty mmbrs’ rols. Th
following sections describe these themes in detail.
Faculty Perceive that PPPs Involve Arranging Student Experiential Learning
When asked to describe what workforce development-oriented PPPs are, all nine faculty
participants interviewed reported these arrangements consisted of arranging some manner of

83
experiential learning for students, such as internships and work experiences. Alfred explained
how h has hlpd crat connctions btwn studnts’ classroom learning and on-the-job
experiences:
That means finding internships—either paid or unpaid. And making sure that
students are learning the related job skills and gaining the experience they need
rather than just taking the course and getting a grade in the course. We are trying
to connect the teaching we do with the actual job they need to learn and do down
th road. It’s about conncting a bridg btwn th job markt and th cours w
are teaching. I have facilitated many of those industry connections, the
mentorship opportunities, the work-based learning experiences, and the
internships.
Jamie described the apprenticeship program designed and implemented in collaboration
with th local Small Businss Dvlopmnt Cntr to support studnts’ larning. Jamie noted
that in the realm of workforce development, provision of seminars for students and substantial
advisory support with panelists have been substantial contributions from the Small Business
Dvlopmnt Cntr. Sh xplaind, “W provid thm with the foundational academic
knowledge they need and they have an opportunity to get the hours in the industry from any of
th apprnticship partnrships that w hav.” Sh xplaind that th mployr can thn mak a
determination regarding whether or not to offer the candidate a full-time position. Jamie stated
the faculty reportedly have high hopes for the success of this endeavor.
Michelle noted that her department is focused on students who are looking for
mploymnt. Sh addd, “That opportunity of mployment gives them a better financial situation
to go on to four-year school or graduate school down the road, because now they're gainfully

84
mployd and thy'r abl to tak car of thmslvs.” Brnda associatd workforc
development with the creation of internship courses due to their personal experience of obtaining
a degree and then having no work prospects. She shared her story of having attended a
prestigious state university throughout her academic career. She described diligently studying in
order to obtain employment with a prestigious organization. However, upon her college
graduation, she stated that she found herself lacking in social connections, knowledge, and
substantial professional development, despite having attended a program designed to equip her
for the workforce. She reported subsequently attending graduate school on scholarship due to her
participation in xtracurricular activitis. Sh xplaind sh blivd sh “should know mor at
this point," but reported that she still did not. Therefore, she accepted the only available position,
which was at a small organization operating in an unrecognized market. As a result of working
overnight for so little pay, she stated she had to find another job during the day to pay her
expenses. She reported putting forth every effort at a full-time job seven days a week to advance
her career. Notwithstanding her advancement, her reported her annual salary remaining stagnant
at $19,000. Meanwhile, her roommate, who reportedly held a better position, was at a low salary
as well, but was supported financially by her parents. Brenda stated her limitation as lacking
connctions and rsourcs. Sh rcalld, “I had som loans and was just struggling to try and
figure out how I was ever going to reach my goal without any connections, without knowing
anyone, even though I felt like I was skilled.
Faculty Perceive that PPPs Involve Collaborating with Other Industry Players
Only three of the nine participants described additional activities being part of workforce
development-oriented PPPs, such as two faculty members associating it with collaborating with
other industry players, such as volunteering in high schools related to their discipline or

85
coordinating curricula across institutions. One of these participants shard, “Crosstown Hub in
2017-2018 was formed primarily to create dialogue among area community colleges to discuss
close collaboration between curriculum. This allowed students to participate and visit other
campuss to larn som skill.”
Few Faculty Perceive that PPPs Involve Training the Local Existing Workforce
Only two participants cited workforce development that involved training the existing
workforce in the local community. While this does not qualify as a theme, it is important to note
how few acknowledged this. Michelle explained that it involves providing assistance to members
of the community who are enrolled in lifelong learning programs, including those who are
interested in skill enhancement, career exploration, or a change in careers. She addd, “I'v bn
very involved with that. I've been passionate about not just supporting it but presenting and
markting it in such a way so it bcoms a dynamic option for individuals.”
Notably, Frank, the other participant reporting this theme, stated he was involved in
Industry 4.0, which is intended to equip citizens with the skills to secure middle-skill, well-paid
positions within th Los Angls County manufacturing sctor to hlp support citizns’
economic security and fulfill labor shortages (Los Angeles Regional Consortium, 2021). Yet,
Frank was unabl to xplain what Industry 4.0 was about or what it did, sharing, “As far as what
th spcific initiativs would b, I would b unabl to call thos out as a participant in thos.”
Faculty Perceive that Workforce Development is Outside Faculty Members’ Role
When asked whether participation in workforce development-oriented PPPs fell within or
outsid faculty mmbrs’ rols, only Simon rportd, “Th opportunity for our studnts to gt
hands-on experience with current and emerging technologies is at the heart of my work here as
an instructor.” Notably, Simon slf-reported being new in his role. The other eight faculty

86
mmbrs rportd that curating studnts’ practical xprincs was important but fll outside
faculty mmbrs’ contractual obligations. Frank xplaind that workforc dvlopmnt fostrs
connections between our academic departments, programs, and industry, as well as with key
administration partnrs. H notd, “As a tam faculty, officially, it's outside of my role.
Unofficially, I would say it's within my role as faculty member, but the school has no contractual
or rquirs any obligation to participat.” Chuck commntd, “Hlping arrang studnt work
xprincs is vry important,” noting that his collg is diffrnt from othrs. “Yt, it's not
ncssary that faculty to do this. It's an xtra stp that w ar taking.” Ann rflctd, “Gtting
students into the workforce is what we're here for. That's really the vast majority of our students,
no mattr what ag or point in thir carr.” Rflcting on faculty attituds, sh addd, “I think
thr's a gap in som faculty mmbrs’ awarnss,” xplaining that som bliv it dos not
relate to their subject matter.
Research Question 2: What Motivates Faculty Members to Participate in Workforce
Development-Oriented PPPs?
Fiv thms mrgd from participants’ rsponss. Each thm was citd by thr to nin
participants. The following sections describe these themes in detail.
Faculty Desire to Support Students’ Long-Term Success
All nin participants citd th dsir to support studnts’ long-term success, noting that
gaining practical work experience was a central aspect of student education. Jaime explained the
rol that with apprnticships, “w want to pair students with employers who will be able to
show them the foundational skills of their industry so they can become employable, reach for
promotion, and b valuabl mploys in th futur.” Sh addd that th program works vry
well, and that th ntir dpartmnt hops for th program’s succss and th succss of studnts.

87
Michelle explained the value of work experience for students and how they try to link inclass instruction to the external world, noting that working directly with employers provides
students with insight into their requirements as employers. She reported that the practical
experience they need to acquire is incorporated into her curriculum and she will explicitly tell
students why she is discussing a particular subject. Michell obsrvd, “By th nd of th
semester, students will talk about LLCs and sole proprietorships. They were not doing that when
thy walkd into th class 16 wks arlir.”
Several faculty members expressed the care and passion they have for supporting
students and businesses be successful. Frank described that he has a genuine passion and love for
his students, emphasizing his deep affection for them and his desire to connect them to their
careers. He summarized that he prioritizes their needs above all else. He further added that he
also cares for the community and values his valuable partnerships within his industry. What
drives him is the knowledge that his sacrifice of time leads to meaningful changes in the lives of
individuals within their communities. There are also advisory committees in place to ensure
constant communication with individuals in the workforce, allowing him and his colleagues to
idntify businss nds and pinpoint any aras that rquir attntion. H addd, “I would lik to
somehow be more involved in bridging those gaps, to prepare students and also to prepare
mployrs.”
Brenda shared that watching students excel in school and then fail once they reach the
workforc motivats hr to lvat studnts’ long-term success through internships. She
explained that witnessing the potential of highly skilled students go to waste was what motivated
her conscious decision to return to teaching. She reported she teaches them how to excel in
school, and they diligently follow each step, completing their education. However, upon

88
finishing, she stated they still find themselves lacking the necessary connections or skills to
establish themselves in the industry they were trained for. The result is exceptionally talented
students who have completed all th tasks assignd and, as sh lamntd, thy “now thy work in
a AAA call center or as a dog groomer or at Sephora. Others transfer and attend Berkeley, where
they now work at Sphora.” Sh xprssd concrn and dismay at what was happning. Sh
stated, “Th driving mission of my work in this last ra of m as an ducator is figuring out how
to hlp studnts gt toholds in comptitiv filds so that thy can show what thy'r capabl of.”
Brenda asserted that if students get their first post-college opportunity, things will fall into place.
She posited that many of them would thrive, noting several examples of students who have
established themselves and doing well in their careers.
Faculty Gain Intrinsic Fulfillment and Satisfaction from Participating in PPPs
The second theme cited by all nine participants was that supporting student success by
helping them gain practical experience produced a sense of intrinsic sense of fulfillment and
satisfaction. Jami simply statd, “Th bst rward is that w'r creating different programs,
diffrnt avnus, and diffrnt rsourcs studnts ar abl to tap into.” Chuck dscribd having
a long-term view of the rewards and return of helping students. He discussed how he believes
that whatever he does, if he does not get compensated immediately, he will eventually receive
compensation in the form of a dollar amount or through recognition and support from
unexpected sources. He shared he sometimes fails to take action, and as a result, he does not
achieve his desired outcomes. He also shared that sometimes he does things with no immediate
financial compensation. In those cases, he asserted that a return would come after some time has
passed. In those events, he stated he would realize that the efforts he put forth earlier resulted in

89
rciprocation from an individual or an organization. H addd, “Th rward is not immdiat in
som cass. I bliv if I do th bst possibl thing I can do, th rward will com back.”
Frank similarly noted the intrinsic rewards they received, further emphasizing that if the
rewards are rooted in other outcomes (e.g., compensation or reduced workloads), there is a risk
in faculty members becoming focused on things that undermine education. He noted that he
experiences internal rewards because the incentives provided are highly advantageous for
individuals in the community, including students. He shared that this is his primary motivation.
He stated he no longer relies on stipends as much, and occasionally he has the option to take on a
faculty load or a reduced workload. However, he stated that this diminishes his enthusiasm for
his passions as well. He reported thoroughly enjoying being in the classroom and not
appreciating it when the programs reduce one of his class loads. He shared that, as a faculty
member, he finds that his purpose is defeated by the way he feels about it. Frank stated that when
one focuses solely on the stipend, it may lead to pursuing the opportunity for the wrong motives,
despite the fact that the stipend is intended to compensate for one's time. However, this situation
can sometimes become precarious, as it may become solely fixated on that aspect. Once the
funding dries up, the stipend disappears. After the outcomes have been determined and the
program has concluded. However, if the focus shifts, the program will carry on. He summarized,
“It's rally my rward is mor intrinsic and mor of th rward systm within th participants
who will b rciving th outcoms of ths initiativs.”
Michelle emphasized that there is a symbiotic effect where faculty members feel an
internal sense of reward and fulfillment helping students and, in turn, engaging with the students
gives them an emotional lift as well. She emphasized that instead of solely focusing on the
rewards that come from reaching and impacting students' lives, it is important to acknowledge

90
that they also have a profound impact on her own life, regardless of whether others recognize it
or not. She stated that simply getting to know the students and witnessing their growth,
observing their excitement, witnessing their determination to pursue their goals, and
acknowledging the significance of their endeavors is rewarding. She reported that even on her
worst day when she just wants to go home and crawl into bed, she immediately becomes
engaged and filled with excitement within 30 seconds after walking into the classroom. She
addd, “It's so dynamic that it maks your day. It absolutly maks your day that thy ar
learning. You hope that they are learning from you and, at the same time, you're gaining
somthing from your rlationship with thm.”
Faculty Experience Departmental Pressure to Participate in PPPs
Seven of the nine participants reported that departmental pressure motivated them to get
involved in workforce-dvlopmnt orintd PPPs. Jami shard, “I can only spak for my
dpartmnt, and it is prtty much compltly rquird.” Jami notd th only way thy would
secure funding is by proceeding with the funding applications and collaborating with the
workforce development office. She added that without faculty efforts, the program would not
receive the necessary funding. Jamie is highly motivated to ensure that everyone is fully engaged
because she reported that participating in it would be in the best interest of the students. She
summarized that, at the end of the day, she wants to be involved as much as she can, to the extent
she can contribute.
Michelle was careful to distinguish between departmental pressure and departmental
understanding of the value of workforc dvlopmnt for studnts. Sh statd, “In my
dpartmnt, it's xpctd. It's part and parcl of what happns and what gos on.” Sh addd that
it is not something that is expected in a forceful or aggressive manner. She reported having a

91
deep understanding of the different aspects of workforce development and how they contribute
to building what is necessary for students. She stated it was not something that could be
considrd or anticipatd: “Adjunct and full-time faculty fully embrace the idea of creating
classes that go beyond traditional lecturing. They prioritize integration and active involvement to
enhance our students' awareness and understanding of the real-world work opportunities
availabl to thm.” Sh addd that ths xprincs nhance the relationship with the businesses
in terms of their expectations when a student is sent to meet them for a position.
Brian similarly statd, “In our program, all th tachrs all th full-timers participate. It's
encouraged. We believe in academic freedom, so we're not going to make anyone do something
thy do not want to do. But it's ncouragd.” H xplaind that it was includd in thir program,
just like another activity that the department engages in annually. He noted that the goal is to
provide students and program participants with a comprehensive understanding of the subject
matter. Brian reported that, last year, they began visiting a relevant workplace located in
downtown Los Angls. According to Brian, th xprinc was “truly rmarkabl.” H notd
that one of the workplace leaders graciously spent 45 minutes answering a wide range of
questions.
Faculty Have Interest in Gaining Closer Ties with Industry by Participating PPPs
Three of the nine participants shared that gaining closer ties with their industry motivated
them to get involved in workforce development-oriented PPPs. Michelle emphasized that
education and industry need to be closely aligned to promote individual and organizational
vitality into th futur. Sh mphasizd, “Businsses out there no longer want to be told by any
school, any collg, any institution, ‘This is what w'r taching, and thr you go—there's your
studnt.’” Nowadays, thr is a growing dmand for individuals to hav a sat at th tabl and

92
express the skills they want. Michelle added that the pace at which the world is evolving is
astonishing, rendering the skills acquired in 2023 obsolete by 2025. She asserted that keeping up
with that requires the active involvement of everyone, particularly in the context of 2-year
colleges because these institutions often attract students who are seeking employment
opportunities. Michelle explained that by providing these students with job prospects, faculty can
help them improve their financial situation and enable them to pursue further education at a 4-
year college or graduate school in the future because the students will be gainfully employed and
able to support themselves.
Frank similarly notd, “Workforc dvlopmnt builds rlationships with faculty, our
divisions, our programs with industry, leading partners with administration as well. Without
those connections, vocational ed curriculums could die out because we require a lot more
funding than som othr programs.” Without thos rlationships, Frank xplaind thre is a
possibility of a decline in enrollment and outcomes, such as a decrease in certificate outputs
within the programs. Frank believed that participation enhances their ability to develop
curriculum and maintain a relationship with the industry, which they consider important.
Faculty Participation in PPPs is Necessary for Obtaining Funding
The final theme, cited by three participants, was that participation in workforce
development-orintd PPPs was ncssary for obtaining funding. Michll xplaind, “It's
directly related to the funding for us, because we kind of straddle between a CTE program and
culinary programs.” Sh addd that th cours rquirs support from xtrnal funding sourcs
that the program currently lacks and the department does not offer because funding is required
for all those things. Therefore, she summarized that faculty must be fully engaged in whatever
challenges the school presents in terms of workforce development.

93
Research Question 3: What Factors Demotivate or Obstruct Faculty Members from
Participating in Workforce Development-Oriented PPPs?
Fiv thms mrgd from participants’ rsponss concrning th obstacls to thir own
involvement. Each theme was cited by three to nine participants. The following sections describe
these themes in detail.
Faculty Perceive Few Benefits for Participation
A significant demotivator reported by eight of the nine participants was that there are few
or no benefits if they participate and no consequences if they neglect to participate in workforce
development-oriented PPPs. Chuck explained that involvement boils down to time and money,
stating, “I'm an accountant. Whatvr I do coms down to tim and mony. I’m constantly
calculating: How much time is it gonna take and, based on that, how much is it gonna cost?” H
emphasized that these projects fall outside his contractual obligations and that faculty do not
need to do this. He noted that arranging internships is an extra step and that faculty members
want compensation. Chuck stated that extra time is hard to compensate for because it is time he
will not get back.
Frank explained that getting involved in these projects affected their lives too much
without adquat rturn. H xplaind, “If w do not s a dirct bnfit of th program for our
students, our programs, or division, it's harder to say yes because of the time requirements we
hav and what littl tim w hav in th wk.” Frank notd that if administration is asking, or if
there's a direct benefit to the program or division, then he found it is easier to agree because of
the benefit for students. Brenda elaborated that the lack of rewards undermines the desire to take
part in ths ndavors. Sh shard, “My whol carr, I rmmbr thm saying, w do not hav
anything extra for you to do this kind of work. I did not even get acknowledgment that I did it.

94
No on has incntivizd m.” Sh furthr xplaind that ambiguity about ths ngagmnts is
evident and there exists a significant divide between non-CTE and CTE faculty in this area. She
reported that faculty members at the college carry a heavy load of expectations, similar to their
colleagues. However, they also bear additional responsibilities without any extra compensation
or relief in return. Brenda noted this as a problem.
Faculty Have Limited Time and Bandwidth to Participate in PPPs
Six of the nine participants additionally reported they lacked the time and bandwidth to
participate in workforce development-oriented PPPs. Chuck noted the problem of little time. He
statd, “Time is not gonna get solved with compensation. That means you have to sacrifice extra
tim Friday and Saturday. It will gt into a situation that you kind of say, ‘Oh, I do not hav tim
for that.’” H addd that h tlls his studnts to work smart rathr than hard and that he tries to
do the same. Chuck explained that, for him, this means having a good quality of work life and
quality of hom lif. H mphasizd, “You cannot spnd too much tim on somthing that will
affct your prsonal lif.”
Jamie emphasized that workforce development requires significant time and effort and
that both ar lacking in thir dpartmnt. Sh laboratd, “It dos rquir a lot of tim and ffort
because of the other time constraints and administrative duties I have. If there were some
mtings or a short survy, I would try my bst to participat.” Howvr, sh mphasizd sh
was unclear who would have the capacity to take on the task of developing new curriculum and
similar initiatives in the field of workforce development. She reported that she would need to
dedicate a significant amount of time to do so and that they do not have the capacity to reach out
to employers and go through that process.

95
Anne explained that internships increase faculty workloads without having the needed
impact on crdit load. Sh laboratd, “It’s an ongoing challng, and I fl strongly that a rol
should be created. That's a faculty reassigned time role that's just focused on internships and
working directly with the Freeman center and overseeing all ths studnt intrnships.” Sh
described participation in PPPs as a formidable challenge because they are not included in any
faculty contract. She noted that the load pertains to the percentage of each class for a full time,
whereas internship classes hav no workload, pointing out that “othr mthods of involvmnt
must b availabl to faculty.” Sh furthr assrtd it is important for faculty mmbrs to b
actively involved in the process because only a faculty member, whether they are full time or
part time, can be assigned an internship section. She described this as a challenge within the
industry.
Faculty Receive Limited Structure, Accountability, and Resources to Participate in PPPs
Five of the nine participants stated that the lack of structure, accountability, and resources
undermined their ability and interest in participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs.
Michll notd ngaging in ths projcts rquirs “tim managmnt, bing abl to put that all
together and work on it, collaboration, support, rsourcs in th broadr sns,” but that ths
were lacking. She further explained that faculty cannot work within a vacuum for these projects
and b ffctiv bcaus, absnt ths, thy do not hav th tools. Sh addd, “You'v got to
have the tools in the toolbox or the arrows in the quiver to make anything that you undertake
rally work. Othrwis, you'r working at a trmndous disadvantag.” Sh xplaind that
faculty want to know that if they go down a particular road, the institution is sincerely behind
them and that their actions and expressions give the clear indication that the college is
completely behind the endeavor.

96
Brnda pointd out th nd for mor carr support, xplaining, “I think that w nd
program-level support instead of a centralized career center and career counselors. I think they
need to work within academic departments. They are too nuanced and different, and the
accountability is low.” Sh shard sh was unsur who sh should approach for assistanc if sh
encountered any difficulties in arranging an internship. Instead, she reported wanting an
internship support person who was closely involved with the academic department and who
actively collaborates with her. Brenda also expressed her disagreement with the idea of giving
reassigned time to faculty. She shared that faculty members put in different levels of effort and
she requires a reliable partner who can assist in tasks such as building the database of
connections, reaching out to individuals, facilitating communication with students, and providing
leadership at a program level. She further posited that it would be beneficial for them to
collaborate with faculty members who have strong connections and regularly engage with
students. According to Brenda, enriching the faculty would be beneficial. She reported that it is
important to understand which team is responsible for this and to be clear about when a faculty
member is asked to do tasks that are not related to their role, such as administrative work.
George added that most faculty do not have industry connections or time to engage in
ths projcts. H shard, “I am lucky nough to hav my brothr still working in th industry, so
I could still hav convrsations with him and my frinds too.” Bcaus of his personal network,
“I can bring in tchnicians to talk to th studnts, and I intgrat it into th curriculum. I'll bring
it into my intro class, so studnts can s what it is to b a tchnician in th industry.” H furthr
stressed that time and getting additional faculty members are of the utmost importance. He
explained the challenge to recruit new employees due to the lower number of full-time
equivalent students his department generates compared to other departments like English or

97
math. Therefore, he reported that his classrooms are smaller and classes have only up to 20
students. George added that the classes are kept small primarily due to the limited size of the
shop and fire codes, which restrict the number of students they can accommodate. Additionally,
George noted the need for increased individualized instruction with the students, as they are
actively engaged in working on cars within the shop. George emphasized the importance of
ensuring these students are able to perform the task properly once they graduate. He summarized
that the addition of a new faculty member would greatly assist in both financial and time-related
matters.
Faculty Lack of Industry Connections to Support Their Participation in PPPs
Finally, three of the nine participants stated that a lack of industry connections
undermined their ability and interest in participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs.
These participants described difficulty having the time to find and foster industry connections.
George noted that bringing other industry players to engage with the students allows for a fresh
perspective. He added that although he himself has industry experience, he is their instructor and
thus is viewed differently by students compared to external speakers. He explained that when a
student hears from someone else who works in the industry, the impact is much greater. He
shared he has observed instances where speakers express their desire to participate, and they
engage the students for two to three hours at a time. He summarized that a good way to assess
the effectiveness of the instructors in their outreach efforts with industry is the strength of their
industry rlationships. Yt, Gorg wondrd aloud, “How ar w going to do this with our
office hours and all this othr stuff w hav to do?”

98
Faculty Have Varying Degrees of Knowhow to Participate in PPPs
One area of investigation was whether a perceived lack of knowhow served as a
demotivator. Only Simon, who was a new faculty member, expressed the need for some
guidance around how to participate. He shared his lack of awareness about the steps involved or
what to do. H shard, “I tnd to work wll whn I know th rquird stps and whr to bgin.
As a nw faculty mmbr hr, I am still larning this procss.” H summarized that a mentor
who could guide him along the way would be very helpful.
The remaining eight participants expressed confidence and knowhow in the event they
chos to participat. On xplaind, “Thr ar no difficultis to my involvmnt that I can think
of. We we're all pretty good at keeping contact with the industry in our area. We have people
from th industry to talk to th studnts.” Michll xplaind, “I'm prtty adpt at working
extremely independently, and being able to use and access resources, or to ask when need arises.
I'm also vry rsourcful.” Sh xprssd hr confidnc that sh is focusd on figuring out how
to make something come together and work, even if it seems a bit convoluted at first. However,
she reported being able to perciv th solutions and find th paths to scap: “It's just somthing
that has happened many times over my career. I approach tasks with a determined mindset,
focusing on the necessary actions without getting caught up in unnecessary questions or
concerns. Ths projcts ar managabl.”
Summary
Three research questions were examined as part of this study. The first question explored
faculty perspectives about participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs relative to their
role and contract within the college. All nine participants believed that these activities primarily
or exclusively concerned arranging student internships and work experience. Only three

99
participants included interaction with the broader community within the definition of workforce
development-orintd PPPs and only two of ths participants includd training citizns’ skills
within that definition. Only one participant believed involvement in workforce developmentoriented PPPs was within the scope of faculty member work. The remaining eight participants
blivd that although it was important, it fll outsid faculty mmbrs’ contractual obligations.
Research Question 2 explored the factors that would motivate faculty members to
participate in workforce development-oriented PPPs. All nine participants stated that their
motivation rests in the intrinsic sense of fulfillment and satisfaction they gain from helping
students and from their belief that gaining practical work experience is central to student
education and enhances students’ long-term success. Seven participants additionally stated that
their departmental culture prioritizes and encourages faculty participation in these efforts, while
three identified their involvement in workforce development-oriented PPPs as a requirement for
funding and another three participants valued the strengthened connection with their industry
they gained from the experience.
The third and final research question sought to identify the factors that demotivate or
obstruct faculty members from participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs. All
participants except the self-reported new faculty member expressed confidence in their ability to
offer value to these efforts. Eight of the nine participants stated that a primary demotivator was
the few or no benefits for participating and no consequences for neglecting to participate in
workforce development-oriented PPPs. Six participants stated a lack of time and bandwidth to
participate and five reported the lack of structure, accountability, and resources undermined their
ability and interest in participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs. Three participants
additional stated their lack of industry connections precluded them from participating in

100
workforce development-oriented PPPs. This chapter reported the thematic findings drawn from
the present study. The next and final chapter provides a discussion of these results.

101
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
The purpose of this study was to examine community college faculty perspectives
regarding participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs. This chapter provides a
discussion of the study findings. A summary of findings is provided first, following by a
discussion of the connection to literature and an original model for motivating faculty
participation in workforce development-oriented PPPs. Practical recommendations for
community colleges are then offered, following by limitations and suggestions for continuing
research.
Discussion of Findings
Three research questions were examined as part of this study. The findings for each
question and their implications were considered. The results of this examination and
interpretation are presented in the following sections.
Faculty Perspectives Regarding Involvement in Participation in Workforce DevelopmentOriented Partnerships
The faculty members interviewed as part of the present study reported getting involved in
helping students get practical work experience. Only two participants cited workforce
development that involved training the existing workforce in the local community. One of these
faculty members could only report being involved in an initiative but not being able to describe
what that initiative involved. Furthermore, all nine participants reported that workforce
development activities primarily or exclusively concerned arranging student internships and
work experience. This is notable because this definition was explicitly spelled out verbally and in
writing to participants in the interview as:

102
workforce development refers to policies and programs focused on helping youth
and adults build vocational knowledge and skills. This occurs through the
collaborative efforts of employers, educational institutions, private training.
Sometimes these are assessing the need for knowledge and skill development,
planning curricula, and developing courses.
Nonetheless, seven of the nine participants appeared to miss this important detail. It was
unclear why or how they missed this information. It is notable that they appeared to miss the
meaning of upskill and instead focused on creating and delivering instruction for students.
Only one participant believed involvement in workforce development-oriented PPPs was
within the scope of faculty member work. The remaining eight participants believed that
although it was important, it fll outsid faculty mmbrs’ contractual obligations. Ths
findings are notable because it reveals a lack of understanding regarding their role as public
servants given their employment in a community college, which by its nature is funded by taxes
and has a duty to serve its community. This is a notable omission because the duty of a
community college is to be a service provider to the existing workforce. As public servants, the
entire workforce within the community are members of their student body.
The study findings reveal a significant gap in faculty perceptions regarding their roles at
the institution. Specifically, the participants appear to be primarily focused on their identities as
educators concerned with their studnts’ acadmic succss, rathr than sing thmslvs as
community partners engaged in broader workforce development initiatives. This mindset is
evident in their prioritization of traditional student teaching roles over community engagement
and training the existing workforce.

103
In this study, faculty members showed a lack of understanding and engagement with the
concept of upskilling and reskilling the existing workforce. Despite efforts to present the
importance of these activities, faculty responses indicate a narrow focus on internships and other
experiential training opportunities, often neglecting the broader implications and responsibilities
towards community workforce development. This indicates a need for significant cultural and
perceptual shifts among faculty members.
Th study’s findings that faculty rsponss cntrd on studnt work xprincs rathr
than on community upskilling rval a fundamntal misalignmnt with th collg’s institutional
mission. Namely, community colleges, by design, have a dual mission: to educate new students
and to support th ongoing dvlopmnt of th community’s workforc. Howvr, faculty at th
study setting often do not see themselves as integral to this broader mission. They lack awareness
of their potential impact on the local economy and community health through workforce
development. This misalignment is further evidenced by the minimal faculty involvement in
public-private partnerships essential for community and economic development.
The culture of community partnership among faculty needed for success in workforce
development may be the result barriers created by the tenure system and existing contractual
obligations. The tenure system provides job security that, in some cases, leads to complacency.
Once tenure is achieved, there is less incentive for faculty to engage in activities outside their
traditional teaching roles, such as community partnerships and workforce development
initiatives. Moreover, the lack of explicit requirements or incentives in faculty contracts to
participate in community-oriented projects further perpetuates this disconnect.
Correcting this problem will require a multipronged effort. One initiative concerns
professional development—namely, implementing comprehensive professional development

104
programs that emphasize the importance of community engagement and the role of faculty in
workforce development. These programs should include training on the economic impact of
community colleges and the significance of equipping the existing workforce. Faculty contracts
and evaluation procedures also need to be modified faculty contracts to include explicit
responsibilities and incentives for participating in community partnership initiatives. Regular
evaluations should incorporate metrics related to community engagement and workforce
development contributions. These efforts also may trigger a cultural shift within the institution
that aligns faculty roles with the broader mission of community colleges. Culture shift can be
achieved through awareness campaigns, leadership initiatives, and incorporating community
partnership values into the core mission statement of the institution.
Finally, it will be important to recalibrate any advisory committees to play a more active
role in bridging the gap between faculty and community needs. These committees should focus
on identifying opportunities for upskilling and reskilling the local workforce and advising faculty
on integrating these opportunities into their teaching and outreach efforts.
By addressing these issues, community colleges can better align faculty roles with their
dual mission of educating new students and supporting ongoing community development,
thrby maximizing thir impact on local conomis and community halth. Participants’
responses revealed an absence of a common understanding of what a private-public partnership
is and how it can benefit a community college. These findings reveal a significant need to raise
faculty mmbrs’ awarnss about workforc dvlopmnt and thir involvement in it.
Supportive structures also would be helpful for structuring and reinforcing their involvement.
The recommendations and suggestions for continued research outlined later in this chapter
provide starting points for these efforts.

105
Faculty Motivation to Participate in Workforce Development-Oriented Partnerships
Research Question 2 explored the factors that would motivate faculty members to
participate in workforce development-oriented PPPs. All nine participants stated that their
motivation rests in the intrinsic sense of fulfillment and satisfaction they gain from helping
students and from their belief that gaining practical work experience is central to student
ducation and nhancs studnts’ long-term success. Seven participants additionally stated that
their departmental culture prioritizes and encourages faculty participation in these efforts, while
three identified their involvement in workforce development-oriented PPPs as a requirement for
funding and another three participants valued the strengthened connection with their industry
they gained from the experience.
Based on these findings, it appears that the strongest motivators for faculty members to
become involved in workforce development are those that center around supporting their current
studnts’ long-term success. Seven of the nine participants additionally appeared to be
influenced by departmental culture to participate. A smaller proportion reported being motivated
by gaining closer to industry or needing to be involved for the purpose of obtaining funding.
Based on these findings, it appears that the strongest avenue for encouraging faculty involvement
is to leverage their desire to support current students. Therefore, it would be beneficial to
explicitly identify and emphasize how faculty mmbrs’ involvmnt in training th xisting
workforce in the local community could be used to benefit their current students on campus. It
would beneficial to explore and leverage the potential links between training the existing
workforce in the local community and supporting current students on campus. Recommendations
and suggestions for research later in this chapter further discuss these opportunities.

106
Factors That Demotivate Faculty Participation in Workforce Development-Oriented
Partnerships
The third and final research question sought to identify the factors that demotivate or
obstruct faculty members from participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs. All
participants except the self-reported new faculty member expressed confidence in their ability to
offer value to these efforts. Eight of the nine participants stated that a primary demotivator was
the few or no benefits for participating and no consequences for neglecting to participate in
workforce development-oriented PPPs. Six participants stated a lack of time and bandwidth to
participate and five reported the lack of structure, accountability, and resources undermined their
ability and interest in participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs. Three participants
additional stated their lack of industry connections precluded them from participating in
workforce development-oriented PPPs.
Based on these findings, it appears that faculty members do not see value for themselves
in participating in training the existing workforce in the local community. As result, they have
difficulty creating the time and bandwidth for these activities, they neglect to find the resources
and industry connections to make these happen, and they allow the lack of structure and
accountability to further undermine any efforts to participate in workforce development. Based
on these findings, it appears that the starting point for engaging faculty members is to discover
and emphasize the benefits they could gain from participating in these activities and then
ensuring that these benefits are things they naturally value.
In particular, these findings reveal a significant problem with regard to the unions and
collective bargaining agreements at community colleges, which prioritize traditional academic
roles that focus on teaching, research, and job protections. This emphasis leaves little room for

107
innovative workforce development initiatives. The contracts often lack provisions that encourage
faculty to engage with local industries or participate in workforce development programs.
Faculty contracts, as shaped by unions, generally do not offer incentives for engaging in
workforce development. Without explicit contractual rewards or obligations, faculty are less
motivated to participate in activities beyond their teaching duties. This lack of incentive is a
significant barrier to integrating workforce development into faculty responsibilities.
Further, the unionized environment can foster resistance to change, particularly when
new initiatives challenge the status quo. Tenured faculty, protected by strong union agreements,
may feel less pressure to adopt new roles or engage in activities that extend beyond traditional
teaching, such as community partnerships or workforce development. This resistance can stifle
efforts to align faculty roles with broader institutional goals, especially because current collective
bargaining agreements do not hold faculty accountable for contributions to workforce
development. Evaluations and performance metrics focus on teaching and research output, with
little to no consideration for community engagement or the success of workforce training
programs. This lack of accountability undermines the institution's ability to fulfill its mission of
supporting both academic and community needs.
Revising faculty contracts to include specific responsibilities related to workforce
development may help ensure that these activities are recognized as essential components of
faculty roles. Contracts should mandate participation in public-private partnerships, the
development of training programs for existing workers, and collaboration with local industries to
align curricula with community needs.
Introducing incentives such as stipends, grants, or additional professional development
opportunities for faculty who engage in workforce development can significantly boost

108
participation. Contracts could also offer reduced teaching loads or additional compensation for
faculty involved in significant community partnership projects.
Establishing clear accountability measures within faculty contracts is crucial. These
measures should include specific performance metrics related to the development and success of
workforce training programs, faculty involvement in community partnerships, and tangible
outcomes like job placements and upskilling achievements. Regular evaluations should reflect
these contributions to ensure faculty are rewarded for their community engagement efforts.
Revising faculty contracts also might help trigger a needed cultural shift within the
institution. Emphasizing the importance of community engagement and workforce development
in contracts and professional development programs can help create an institutional culture that
values and prioritizes these activities. This cultural shift can be reinforced through
comprehensive onboarding processes and continuous professional development that highlight the
role of community partnerships.
Advocating for policy changes at the state or system level can further support the
integration of workforce development into faculty roles. Legislative mandates requiring faculty
participation in workforce development initiatives can provide the necessary framework to
ensure that community colleges fulfill their dual mission of education and community economic
development.
The current focus on unions and collective bargaining in community colleges often
undermines faculty participation in workforce development due to rigid contractual obligations,
lack of incentives, resistance to change, and fragmented accountability. By revising faculty
contracts to incorporate explicit workforce development roles, enhancing incentives, establishing
clear accountability measures, fostering a cultural shift, and advocating for supportive policies,

109
community colleges can better align faculty efforts with their mission to support both academic
education and community economic growth. Future practical recommendations and research
could help uncover the benefits, the possible benefits for faculty members, and how those could
be communicated and leveraged for faculty involvement.
Connection to Past Literature
The literature examined for this study explored the organizational, social, and personal
factors that motivate or demotivate faculty members from engaging in workforce development.
Organizational factors concern the contractual requirements of the position, which influences
whether the faculty member believes their involvement in PPPs falls within or outside their
employment contract (Organ et al., 2006; Ryan & Dunn-Jensen, 2016). The study findings
rvald that thr wr no prcivd contractual rquirmnts driving faculty mmbrs’
involvement in workforce development. Those faculty members who appeared to be slightly
more involved in workforce development connected these efforts with a requirement for
receiving funding. This gap reveals a need for policy change so that faculty members gain the
understanding that engaging in workforce development oriented toward training the existing
workforce in the local community does fall within the scope of their responsibilities.
Social setting factors concern whether participation in PPPs is expected within the culture
of th faculty mmbr’s dpartmnt or institution. Whn conduciv social factors xist, pr
pressure to participate in workforce development can arise (Feather & Rauter, 2004; Ryan &
Dunn-Jensen, 2016; Van Dyne & Ellis, 2004; Vigoda-Gadot, 2007). Similarly, a faculty
mmbr’s anxity about bing valuatd poorly by prs in th organization, whthr formally or
informally, can affect their choice of involvement (Feather & Rauter, 2004). In the same way,
concerns about their reputation and status among their faculty peers can influence their choice to

110
participate. Social setting factors appeared to have some influence on faculty mmbrs’ dcisions
to get involved in workforce development. For example, seven of the nine participants reported
that developmental pressure departmental pressure motivated them to get involved. However, it
is noteworthy that this involvement concerned helping students get practical experience and
internships rather than supporting workforce development engagements oriented toward training
th xisting workforc in th local community. Faculty mmbrs’ rputation and status did not
appear to be attached to any form of workforce development, whether it concerned supporting
current students or assisting with training the existing workforce in the local community. Faculty
members appeared to have no sense of rewards related to training the existing workforce in the
local community, nor were their reputations or status influenced by their involvement in
workforce development.
Prsonal factors affcting faculty mmbrs’ dcisions includ thir prcption of thir
role as a faculty member (i.e., whether participation in a PPP is within their role, regardless of
whether it is specified in their employment contract; Organ et al., 2006). Furthermore, faculty
mmbrs’ prcptions of thir potntial for succss, th intrinsic and xtrinsic rwards associatd
with their involvement and success, and the values of those rewards also were anticipated to
influence their decisions to participate (Vroom, 1964). Personal factors appeared to play a
significant rol on faculty mmbrs’ dcisions to ngag or not ngag in workforce
development. Specifically, the faculty members appeared to perceive any workforce
development efforts—even those involving students getting practical work experience and
internships—as falling outside their role. The value to them of their engagement and workforce
dvlopmnt cntrd on th sns of fulfillmnt and satisfaction in supporting studnts’ longterm success. Participants appeared to have no sense of the concept nor of rewards stemming

111
from training the existing workforce in the local community. Participants in the study expressed
that there were few perceived benefits and no apparent consequences for not engaging in
workforce development. Therefore, evaluation anxiety appeared to be absent.
Overall, the theory and literature examined for the study help explain why the present
study participants were not concerned with engaging in workforce development. Namely,
contractual requirements were lacking and cultural expectations were minimal. In turn,
evaluation anxiety, understanding of the nature of their involvement, and concerns about the
impact of non-involvement on rewards, achievement, reputation or status were lacking.
Moreover, participants did not perceive workforce development to fall within their role, and their
sense of satisfaction appears to be rooted in supporting current students succeed rather than
investing in the skill development of their community. The next section offers recommendations
for aiding community college administrators in further examining and enhancing faculty
membrs’ motivations to participat in ths ngagmnts. Suggstions for continud rsarch,
offered later in this chapter, additionally outline frontiers for gaining further insights about how
community college faculty members could become engaged in workforce development efforts.
Implications
The study findings indicate that faculty hiring practices in community colleges,
particularly at the study setting, show a significant disconnect between the qualifications sought
in faculty and the actual skills needed to fulfill the institution's mission of workforce
development. The hiring practices seem to mirror those of more research-focused institutions,
which emphasize terminal degrees and academic qualifications rather than the practical industry
experience and skills relevant to workforce development and central to the mission of

112
community colleges. This traditional approach fails to align with the community college's unique
role in bridging academic education and practical skills training.
Findings from this study additionally suggest that the institution has issues with
organizational capacity. Namely, the existing hiring practices do not adequately address the need
for faculty capable of engaging in workforce development activities, such as designing practical
experiences and apprenticeships. This gap is particularly evident in the hiring of full-time
faculty, where the emphasis remains on academic credentials rather than industry experience.
Furthermore, the reliance on adjunct faculty, who are often hired for their industry experience,
does not sufficiently compensate for the lack of full-time faculty involvement in workforce
development initiatives. This leads to a fragmented approach where adjuncts handle practical
training without the cohesive support and involvement of the full-time faculty.
The hiring and capacity issues plaguing the institution belie an even more fundamental
issues that the institution's support structures seem misaligned with its workforce development
goals. Consequently, a pervasive lack of understanding and emphasis on the role community
colleges play in community and workforce development is evident among the faculty. This
misalignment is compounded by the absence of clear policies and incentives that encourage
faculty to engage with local industries and participate in workforce development initiatives.
Furthermore, professional development programs are not sufficiently tailored to enhance
faculty's capacity to contribute to workforce development. There is a need for a more robust
onboarding process and continuous professional development tracks that emphasize the
importance of community engagement and practical training. Moreover, the institution should
recalibrate its advisory committees to include a stronger focus on upskilling and reskilling the

113
existing workforce, thereby ensuring that faculty are well-equipped and motivated to engage in
these activities.
Faculty members also play a role in the disconnects uncovered in the study findings.
Specifically, the faculty interviewed do not see themselves as integral to community
development or responsible for training the existing workforce. This is partly due to a lack of
institutional emphasis on these roles and partly due to the absence of accountability measures.
Faculty evaluations and incentives are primarily focused on traditional academic metrics rather
than contributions to workforce development and community engagement. For example, the
tenure system and existing faculty contracts create barriers to accountability. Tenured faculty are
often not required to engage in workforce development activities, leading to a culture where such
initiatives are not prioritized. The lack of contractual obligations and clear expectations
regarding faculty participation in public-private partnerships and community engagement further
exacerbates this issue.
Recommendations for Practice
Fiv rcommndations for incrasing faculty mmbrs’ involvmnt in workforc
dvlopmnt PPPs ar outlind basd on th prsnt study’s findings. First, it is important to
raise faculty member awareness about their role in workforce development. The study findings
indicated that the faculty were not aware of workforce development engagements and their role
in training the existing workforce in the local community, even when it was spelled out by the
researchers. This reveals the need for significant awareness raising and education delivered by
th institution’s workforc dvlopmnt division to faculty mmbrs. This could occur through
town hall meetings or other forms of organizational communication with current staff and by
emphasizing the role of faculty as public servants during hiring processes.

114
Second, it is necessary to communicate explicit connections about the impact of faculty
involvement in workforce development on currnt studnts’ long-term success. The study
findings rvald that faculty wr strongly motivatd to support thir currnt studnts’ longterm success and that doing so was a source of significant satisfaction. It would be beneficial to
explore and lvrag faculty mmbrs’ intrst in supporting currnt studnts and thinking about
how that interest could be leveraged to engage them in workforce development. For example,
faculty members may be more interested in supporting these efforts if they understood the direct
connction btwn training th xisting workforc in th local community and currnt studnts’
success. This aim can be supported by revising hiring practices whereby the focus of faculty
hiring shifts to include significant industry experience and practical skills relevant to workforce
development, particularly for full-time positions.
Third, the study findings revealed that the key factors undermining faculty members
availability and interest in participating workforce development included lack of knowledge
about how to participate, lack of benefits if they participate, lack of implications if they do not
participate, lack of industry connections, and lack of time and bandwidth. These obstacles could
be addressed by creating and implementing frameworks for engaging in these projects and by
creating project management around these efforts. The project manager could outline and plan
the effort so that faculty members understand the time commitment and nature of involvement.
The project manager also could provide the structure, accountability, and support with obtaining
resources needed to successfully complete these assignments. It would be beneficial for
administration to determine what benefits and rewards could be provided to faculty who
participate. Additionally, faculty members may be more motivated if these benefits were
connected to the motivators identified by participants in the study.

115
Fourth, it is important to introduce faculty members into workforce development projects
earlier. The current process for engaging faculty members in workforce development PPPs
oriented toward training the existing workforce in the local community is that the any division of
the college or the workforce development division curates the opportunity with a private party
and only then brings the opportunity to the faculty member to gain their buy-in and participation.
To improv faculty mmbrs’ support and ngagmnt in ths projcts, faculty should b
brought into the conversation at the outset, when the conversation is initially beginning. This
would hlp scur faculty mmbrs’ involvmnt and giv thm an awarnss of th impact thy
could have just in the engagement, beyond their traditional instructional delivery. These tactics
may increase faculty mmbrs’ sns of task maningfulnss, which may incras thir lvl of
involvement.
Fifth, policy and legislative advocacy would be helpful in the effort to advocate for
policy changes that integrate workforce development roles into faculty job descriptions and
performance metrics, ensuring that community colleges fulfill their mission effectively.
Implementation of any changes should be accompanied by an examination of how changes in
policy and funding structures can support or hinder the implementation of revised faculty
contracts focused on workforce development. This includes analyzing the effects of legislative
mandates and funding tied specifically to workforce development activities
By addressing these areas, community colleges can better align their faculty practices
with their mission to support workforce development, thereby enhancing their impact on the
local economy and community.

116
Limitations and Delimitations
The study faced several limitations, including those concerning sampling and bias.
Qualitative research relies on small, purposive samples that are not representative of the
population of interest (Miles et al., 2019). Sampling biases can complicate this situation, and the
temporal and resource limitations linked to doctoral research without funding worsen these
problems. For example, the use of convenience sampling was used, which has been criticized for
its negative effects on external validity. The study's dependence on a limited sample size
restricted the breadth of data obtained and the extent to which the findings could be applied to
other locations. The findings of this qualitative study can be cautiously extrapolated to
community college faculty in other healthcare settings; however, robust findings are best reached
by performing additional research across other settings.
Th study’s rlianc on rsarch intrviwing and slf-reported data also introduced
limitations. One of the main drawbacks of qualitative research interviews is the presence of bias.
First, th rsarchr’s prsonal experiences and attitudes may have influenced data collection and
analysis, which could distort the findings. To mitigate these issues, the study implemented peer
scrutiny and ensured anonymity of participants (Bryman, 2008; Creswell & Creswell, 2022).
Second, participants may provide responses that they perceive as aligning with the researcher's
expectations, conforming to social norms, or portraying themselves or their companies
positively. These biases have the potential to distort the findings and lead to an incomplete or
incorrect grasp of the issue being examined. To mitigate researcher bias, this study implemented
a process of subjecting the analysis to scrutiny by a peer examiner. To mitigate participant biases
in this study, measures were taken to ensure participant anonymity, protect the data, and reassure

117
individuals that there were no objective correct or incorrect responses. Notwithstanding these
efforts, the potential bias persisted.
Delimitations refer to specific aspects of the research design that limit the extent of the
investigation and, consequently, have an impact on the final outcomes (Theofanidis &
Fountouki, 2018). The main delimitation of the current study was its exclusive focus on a single
community college located in the Western United States. This constraint restricted the
applicability of the results to different community college environments. The researcher
presented a detailed account of the institution involved, along with a comprehensive explanation
of the methodology employed to minimize the limitations and enable readers to assess the
relevance of the study findings to their own settings.
Two further study delimitations were the reliance on convenience and snowball sampling
for participant recruitment, which may have resulted in sampling bias and early data saturation
(Creswell & Creswell, 2022). Employing alternative sampling procedures could have yielded a
more heterogeneous sample, resulting in greater variability in the outcomes. Another
delimitation that impacted the study was the inclusion of only six informants from the study
setting. The utilization of a small sample diminishes the scope and quantity of the data.
A final delimitation concerns the nature of case study and the consequent constraints in
generalizing the findings to other settings (Creswell & Creswell, 2022). Although the findings of
this study may have some transferability to other situations, there are certain limitations that
prevent them from being extensively relevant to other organizations. However, this disadvantage
is mitigated by the fact that in such cases, the research findings can be applied to theory and then
be transferred to and benefit other organizations (Yin, 2011).

118
Recommendations for Future Research
Several research suggestions are offered based on this study. The first suggestion pertains
to the findings that the faculty did not understand or recognize the focus of the research, which
was to examine their involvement in workforce development activities centered on training the
existing workforce in the local community. This raises questions about whether community
college employees understand their role as public servants and whether this concept has been
sufficintly built into th cultur. It would b bnficial to gaug faculty mmbrs’
understanding of this and explore approaches to communicating this message in ways that
cultivate a stronger attitude of service to the community among faculty. Action research
approaches could be employed where faculty are engaged as coresearchers, different strategies
could be employed to communicate this message, and the impacts shared. For example, one
approach could involve including faculty members in the dialogue about their role as public
servants.
A second suggestion for research centers on findings that faculty had strong motivation to
support students in gaining practical work experience (e.g., internships). Participants spoke about
thir dsir to support studnts’ long-term success and the intrinsic experience of fulfillment and
satisfaction they gained from doing so. Some participants also noted that there was departmental
encouragement to support internships or that it was a requirement to obtain funding. Three
participants noted that supporting internships enable them to develop stronger ties with industry.
Based on the current findings, it appeared that faculty were not aware of or thinking about how
participating in workforce development oriented toward training the existing workforce in the
local community could benefit them. Therefore, another suggestion for continued research would
be examine successful case studies where community college faculty members were actively

119
involved in workforce development in order to identify the benefits these faculty members
reported experiencing and uncover the strategies other institutions used to successfully engage
faculty. The research could specifically explore mission, strategy, culture, communication,
supportive structures, training, and reward systems at the departmental and institutional levels.
The information gained from this kind of research could be used to educate and motivate the
faculty in the present setting to get involved or to design these efforts in ways to heighten faculty
mmbrs’ motivation.
A third suggestion for research emerges from the finding that an obstacle to faculty
involvement in workforce development is a lack of structure, accountability, and resources. It
would be helpful to examine the structure and accountability systems other colleges use to
engage faculty members in workforce development. For example, the workforce development
division might crat a training that guids and structurs faculty mmbrs’ fforts in
participating in these activities. The framework could include training, guidance, and check-in
points to keep them engaged, aligned, and on track as they form the industry connections and
locat rsourcs for th ffort. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick’s (2016) framwork for gauging
training impact (i.e., impact on learner feelings, knowledge, behaviors, results, and return on
investment) could be used to assess the outcomes and benefits of the framework and training.
This research project could be a step toward equipping faculty members with better
understanding how they can participate in workforce development and creating the
accountability structures for that to occur.
A fourth suggestion is to explore faculty perspectives regarding their involvement in
workforce development and pinpoint specific obstacles to their engagement. It is crucial to
ascertain whether the lack of participation stems from a fundamental misconception of their

120
responsibilities, lack of enthusiasm, or structural obstacles within existing collective bargaining
agreements and contracts. By including multiple community colleges in the research sample,
researchers could assess whether the present study findings accurately reflect broader patterns.
This comparative analysis may indicate whether specific contractual features or union actions are
notably effective or harmful in various contexts. Empirical research should examine the effects
of updated faculty contracts that include explicit workforce development responsibilities and
incentives. This may entail conducting pilot programs in which new contractual terms are
introduced in specific departments or institutions to assess the impact on academic involvement
and the outcomes of community partnerships. Furthermore, it is crucial to examine the efficacy
of various incentives, including as financial bonuses, decreased teaching loads, and professional
development opportunities, in promoting faculty engagement in workforce development.
Gaining insight into the factors that drive faculty members might assist in customizing contracts
to more effectively correspond with these motivations. Conducting longitudinal studies to
monitor the lasting impacts of modified contracts and incentives on the conduct of faculty
members and their involvement in the community.
Conclusion
This exploratory qualitative case study examined community college faculty perspectives
regarding participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs. Three research questions were
explored: (a) what are faculty perspectives regarding their participation in workforce
development-oriented PPPs relative to their role and contract within the college, (b) what
motivates faculty members to participate in workforce development-oriented PPPs, and (c) what
factors demotivate or obstruct faculty members from participating in workforce developmentoriented PPPs? Nine faculty members who teach career and technical education at the study

121
setting were recruited. Each participant completed a 45- to 60-minute videoconference interview,
wherein they were asked about their perceptions as well as their perceived sources of motivation
and resistance relative to participating in PPPs. The data were examined using thematic analysis.
All nine participants believed that these activities primarily or exclusively concerned arranging
student internships and work experience and only one participant believed that involvement in
workforce development-oriented PPPs was within the scope of faculty member work. All nine
participants stated that their motivation rests in the intrinsic sense of fulfillment and satisfaction
they gain from helping students and from their belief that gaining practical work experience is
cntral to studnt ducation and nhancs studnts’ long-term success. Participants reported that
the primary obstacle to their involvement was the lack of benefits for participating and lack of
consequences for neglecting to participate in workforce development. Lack of time, bandwidth,
structure, accountability, and resources additionally undermined their ability and interest in
participating. Based on these findings, community college administrators are advised to (a)
incras faculty mmbrs’ awarnss that thy ar public srvants and that participating in
workforce development is a central part of that, (b) draw explicit connections between faculty
mmbrs’ natural motivations and th bnfits thy could gain from participating in workforce
development, and instituting project management frameworks and personnel to create structure
and accountability around faculty mmbrs’ involvmnt. Additional rsarch is advisd to (a)
examine and increase faculty members’ undrstanding of thir rol as public srvants, (b)
examine successful case studies of community college faculty member involvement in workforce
development to uncover helpful strategies, and (c) explore supportive structure and
accountability systems other colleges use to engage faculty members in workforce development.

122
References
Advance CTE. (2019). Perkins V: How can the comprehensive local needs assessment drive
improvement? http://blog.careertech.org/?p=15275
American Association of Community Colleges. (2006). Workforce one: Innovation in action.
American Association of Community Colleges.
American Association of Community Colleges. (2022). AACC Fast Facts 2022.
https://www.aacc.nche.edu/research-trends/fast-facts/
American Association of Community Colleges. (AACC). (2021). Trends in community college
enrollment. https://aacc.nche.edu
Ashton, D., Green, F., James, D., & Sung, J. (1999). Education and training for development in
East Asia: The political economy of skill formation in newly industrialized economies.
Routledge.
Asiamah, N., Mensah, H. K., & Oteng-Abayie, E. (2017). General, target, and accessible
population: Demystifying the concepts for effective sampling. The Qualitative Report,
22(6), 1607-1621.
Austin, J. E. (2000). The collaboration challenge. Jossey Bass.
Bahr, P. R., Columbus, R., & Chen, Y. (2022). Are there age disparities in community college
compltion? Evidnc from Ohio’s community collgs. Community College Journal of
Research and Practice, 46(10), 755-762.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2021.1976308
Bailey, T. R., & Cho, S-W. (2010). Developmental education in community colleges.
Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University.
https://doi.org/10.7916/D8JS9NHX

123
Ball, M. A., & Payne, S. C. (1998). Strategic alliances: Building strong ones and making them
last. Presented at the CAUSE98 conference. http://www.educause.edu
Bates, R. A., & Redmann, D. H. (2002). Core principles and the planning process of a worldclass workforce development system. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4(2),
111-120.
Beach, J. M. (2011). Gateway to opportunity: A history of the community college in the United
States. Stylus.
Bellamy, K., Ostini, R., Martini, N., & Kairuz, T. (2016). Seeking to understand: Using generic
qualitative research to explore access to medicines and pharmacy services among
resettled refugees. International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, 38(3), 671-675.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11096-016-0261-1
Bergquist, W., Betwee, J., & Meuel, D. (1995). Building strategic relationships: How to extend
your organization’s reach through partnerships, alliances and joint ventures. Jossey
Bass.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3, 77-101.
Brinkmann & Kvale. (2019) InterViews. Sage.
Brown, K. (2018). Powerful partners: Business and community colleges. National Skills
Coalition. https://www.nationalskillscoalition. org/resources/publications/file/PowerfulPartners-Businesses-and-Community- Colleges.pdf
Buettner, D., Morrison, M., & Wasicek, M. (2002). Successful experiences with making
partnering an operational strategy. In M. S. Spangler (Ed.), Developing successful
partnerships with business and the community (pp. 5-12). Jossey Bass.

124
Bumphus, W. G. (2018, March 3). What are community colleges? Are they vocational schools?
American Association of Community Colleges.
https://www.aacc.nche.edu/2018/03/30/editorial-what-are-community-colleges-are-theyvocational-schools/
Butrymowicz, S., & D'Amato, P. (2020, August 4). Analysis: Hundreds of colleges and
universities show financial warning signs. Federal data shows higher education troubles
long before coronavirus struck. The Hechinger Report.
https://hechingerreport.org/analysis-hundreds-of-colleges-and-universities-showfinancial-warning-signs/
California Community Collgs Chancllor’s Offic. (2022a). Faculty and staff demographics.
https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Chancellors-Office/Divisions/Digital-Innovation-andInfrastructure/research-data-analytics/data-snapshot/faculty-staff-demographics).
California Community Collgs Chancllor’s Offic. (2022b). Key facts.
https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Key-Facts
Carnevale, A., & Fry, R. (2001). The economic and demographic roots of education and
training. Center for Workforce Success and the National Center on Education and the
Economy.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247849533_The_Economic_and_Demographic
_Roots_of_Education_and_Training
Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (2003). The American community college (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Cohen, A. M., Brawer, F. B., & Kisker, C. B. (2014). The American community college (6th ed.).
Jossey-Bass.

125
Comings, J., Reder, S., & Sum, A. (2001). Building a level playing field: The need to expand and
improve the national and state adult education and literacy systems (Occasional Paper).
National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, D. W. (2022). Research methods: Qualitative, quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches. Sage.
Crouch, C., Finegold, D., & Sako, M. (1999). Are skills the answer? The political economy of
skill creation in advanced industrial countries. Oxford University Press.
Curtis, S., Gesler, W., Smith, G., & Washburn, S. (2000). Approaches to sampling and case
selection in qualitative research: examples in the geography of health. Social Science &
Medicine, 50, 1001-1014.
Daniel, B. K. (2019). What constitutes a good qualitative research study? Fundamental
dimensions and indicators of rigour in qualitative research: The TACT framework.
Academic Conferences International Limited. https://doi.org/10.34190/RM.19.113
Davidson, B., Henthorne, T., Ilakkuvan, K., Perlstein, L., Witham, K., & Wyner, J. (2019). The
workforce playbook: A community college guide to delivering excellent career and
technical education. The Aspen Institute. https://highered.aspeninstitute.org/wp-content/
uploads/2019/06/The-Workforce-Playbook_ Final.pdf
Deming, D. J., & Noray, K. (2019). STEM careers and the changing skill requirements of work.
https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/ddeming/ files/dn_stem_june2019.pdf
Dougherty, K., & Bakia, M. (2000). Community colleges and contract training: Content, origins,
and impact. Teachers College Record, 102(1), 197-243.
Drucker, P. (1993). Post-capitalist society. Harper-Collins.

126
Dychtwald, K., Erickson, T. J., & Morison, R. (2006). Workforce crisis: How to beat the coming
shortage of skills and talent. Harvard Business Review Press.
Farooq, M. B., & de Villiers, C. (2017). Telephonic qualitative research interviews: when to
consider them and how to do them. Meditari Accountancy Research, 25(2), 291-316.
https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-10-2016-0083
Feather, N. T., & Rauter, K. A. (2004). Organizational citizenship behaviors in relation to job
status, job insecurity, organizational commitment and identification, job satisfaction and
work values. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 77, 81-94.
https://doi.org/10.1348/096317904322915928
Foster, A. D., & Rosenzweig, M. R. (1996). Technical change and human-capital returns and
investments: Evidence from the green revolution. American Economic Review, 86(4),
931-953.
Friedman, T. (2000). The Lexus and the olive tree: Understanding globalization. Anchor.
Fuller, J. B., Burrowes, J., Raman, M., Restuccia, D., & Young, A. (2014). Bridge the gap:
Rebuilding America’s middle skills. www.hbs.edu/competitiveness/research/Pages/
research-details.aspx?rid=66
Gay, L., Mills, G., & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational research competencies for analysis and
applications (10th ed.). Pearson.
Gilbert, T. (1978). Human competence: Engineering worthy performance. McGraw- Hill.
Giloth, R. P. (2000). Learning from the field: Economic growth and workforce development in
the 1990s. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(4), 340-359.

127
Grubb, N. W., & Lazerson, M. (2004). The education gospel: The economic power of schooling.
Community College Research Center.
https://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/economic-power-schooling.html
Grubb, W. N. (1999). From isolation to integration: Occupational educational and the emerging
systems of workforce development. Centerpoint, 3.
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED429184.pdf
Grubb, W. N., Badway, N., Bell, D., Chi, B., King, C., Herr, J., et al. (1999). Toward order from
chaos: State efforts to reform workforce development system. National Center for
Research in Vocational Education, University of California.
Grubb, W. N., Badway, N., Bell, D., Chi, B., King, C., Herr, J., Prince, H., Kazis, R., Hicks, L.,
& Taylor, J. C. (1999). Toward order from chaos: State efforts to reform workforce
development system. National Center for Research in Vocational Education, University of
California.
Gruber, D. (2000, January 1). We're education...you're semiconductors. Improving worker skills
through employer-community college partnerships (ED438463). ERIC database.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED438463
Hall, B. L. (2002). The right to a new utopia: Learning and the changing world of work in an era
of global capitalism. Paper presented at the Developing Skills for the New Economy:
International Conference on Technical and Vocational Education and Training,
Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Harrison, B., & Weiss, M. (1998). Workforce development networks: Community based
organizations and regional alliances. Sage.

128
Harrison, B., & Weiss, M. (1998). Workforce development networks: Community based
organizations and regional alliances. Sage.
Hawley, J. D., & Sommers, D. (2003). The labor market outcomes of Ohio adult workforce
education students. Center on Education and Training for Employment, The Ohio State
University.
Hawley, J. D., Sommers, D., & Melendez, E. (2003). The impact of institutional collaborations
on the achievement of workforce development performance measures in Ohio. Paper
presented at the Networking and Best Practices in Workforce Development, The Ford
Foundation.
Hoachlander, G., Sikora, A. C., Horn, L., & Carroll, C. D. (2003). Community college students:
Goals, academic preparation, and outcomes: Postsecondary education descriptive
analysis reports. U.S. Department of Education: Institute of Education Sciences NCES
2003–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/e433442005-001
Holzer, H. (2015). Job market polarization and US worker skills: A tale of two middles. The
Brookings Institution.
Illeris, K. (2003). Towards a contemporary and comprehensive theory of learning. International
Journal of Lifelong Education, 22(4), 396-406.
Illinois Community College Board. (2001). Illinois workforce development grant report. Illinois
Community College Board.
Illinois Community College Board. (2007). Illinois workforce development grant report. Illinois
Community College Board.

129
Jacobs, R. L. (1990). Human resource development as an interdisciplinary body of knowledge.
Human Resource Development Quarterly, 1(1), 65-71.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.3920010108
Jacobs, R. L. (2000). Human resource development and the emergence of workforce
development. In W. Ruona & G. Roth (Eds.), Philosophy of human resource development
(pp. 65-70). Berrett-Koehler.
Jacobs, R. L. (2001). Managing employee competence and human intelligence in global
organizations. In F. Richter (Ed.), Maximizing human intelligence in Asia business: The
sixth-generation project. Prentice-Hall.
Jacobs, R., & Hawly, J. (2009). Th mrgnc of “workforc dvlopmnt”: Dfinition,
conceptual boundaries and implications. In R. Maclean & D. Wilson (Eds.), International
handbook of education for the changing world of work (pp. 2537-2552). Springer.
https://www.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5281-1_167
Judy, R., & D'Amico, C. (1997). Workforce 2020: Work and workers in the 21st century.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED409463.pdf
Juszkiewicz, J. (2017). Trends in community college enrollment and completion data, Issue 6.
American Association of Community Colleges. https://www.aacc.nche.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2020/08/Final_community college-Enrollment-2020_730_1.pdf
Kisker, C. & Carducci, R. (2003). UCLA community college review: Community college
partnerships with the private sector-organizational contexts and models for successful
collaboration. Community College Review, 31(3), 55-74.

130
Lancaster, L. (2005). Weaving a fabric of shared resources: Effective collaborations between
higher education and business for business training (Doctoral dissertation). Available
from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (UMI No. 3181843).
Latiolais, S. J., & Hu, X. (2022). Pathways toward (unequal) earnings: Students' choice of career
training programs in Washington state. Journal of Applied Research in the Community
College, 29(1), 87-109.
Leckrone, B. (2022, June 3). Community college enrollment crash continues, career-focused
programs rebound. Best Colleges. https://www.bestcolleges.com/news/communitycollege-enrollment-declines-spring-semester-cte/
Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2004). The new division of labor: How computers are creating the
next market. Russell Sage Foundation.
Los Angeles Regional Consortium. (2021). Our work: Bridging the gap.
https://losangelesrc.org/our-work/
Luaces, M. A., Cearley, M., Chang, K., Cupertino, P., & Ramaswamy, M. (2018). Envisioning
Career Technical Education as a Platform for Student Empowerment. The CTE journal,
6(2), 2–14.
Luse, A., Mennecke, B., & Townsend, A. (2012). Selecting a research topic: A framework for
doctoral students. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 143–152.
https://doi.org/10.28945/1572
Maltin, E. (2019, January 8). What successful public-private partnerships do. Harvard Business
Review. https://hbr.org/2019/01/what-successful-public-private-partnerships-do
Massachusetts Association of Community Colleges. (2024). Workforce training.
https://masscc.org/workforce-training/

131
McLaughlin, M., Lundy-Wagner, V., & Groves, B. (2017). Two years into CCPT: Many
challenges & great promise. California career pathways trust implementation research
report. Jobs for the Future. https://jfforg-prodprime.s3.amazonaws.com/media/
documents/CCPTImplementationReport_03717_0.pdf
McLean, G. (2003). NHRD: Why countries cannot do without it. Paper presented at the Asian
Association of Human Resource Development, Bangkok, Thailand.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social
networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415-444.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
Meier, K. (2018). The historical origins of the comprehensive community college mission, 1901-
1965. In J. S. Levin & S. T. Kater (Eds.), Understanding community colleges (2nd ed.,
pp. 1-20). Routledge.
Melendez, E., Falcón, L. M., Suárez-Boulangger, C., McCormick, L., & de Montrichard, A.
(2004). Community colleges, welfare reform, and workforce development. In E.
Melendez, E. (Ed.), Communities and workforce development (pp. 293-330). Upjohn
Institute for Employment Research.
Melendez, E. (2004). Communities and workforce development. Upjohn Institute for
Employment Research.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Murnane, R., & Levy, F. (1996). Teaching the new basic skills. The Free Press.
National Center for Education Statistics. (NCES). (2022). Career and technical education
statistics. https://nces.ed.gov

132
NCES. (2018). 2015-16 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:16) [AACC
analysis]. https://nces.ed.gov
NCES. (2021). IPEDS Fall 2019 Enrollment by age Survey [AACC analysis]. https://nces.ed.gov
NCES. (2022a). 2017-18 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study Administrative Collection
(NPSAS:18 AC) [AACC analysis]. https://nces.ed.gov
NCES. (2022b). IPEDS Fall 2020 Enrollment Survey [AACC analysis]. https://nces.ed.gov
Organ, D. W., Podsakoff, P. M., & MacKenzie, S. B. (2006). Organizational citizenship
behavior: Its nature, antecedents, and consequence. Sage.
Orr, M. T. (2001). Community colleges and their communities: Collaboration for workforce
development. In D. D. Bragg (Ed.), The new vocationalism in community colleges. New
Directions for Community Colleges (no. 115, pp. 39-49). Wiley.
Osterman, P. (1999). Securing prosperity: The American labor market, how it has changed and
what to do about it. Princeton University Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th ed.). Sage.
Paulsen, M. B., & Smart, J. C. (2001). The finance of higher education: Theory, research, policy
and practice. Agathon.
Pindus, N., M., & Nightingale, D. S. (1995). Improving the upward mobility of low-skill
workers: The case of the health industry. The Urban Institute.
President and Fellows of Harvard College. (2024). Executive education.
https://www.exed.hbs.edu
Qu, S. Q., & Dumay, J. (2011). The qualitative research interview. Qualitative Research in
Accounting & Management, 8(3), 238-264. https://doi.org/10.1108/11766091111162070

133
Regional Technology Strategies. (1999). A comprehensive look at state-funded, employer
focused job training programs. National Governors' Association.
Rivera, R. J., & Paradise, A., (2006). State of the industry report. American Society for Training
and Development.
Rosenzweig, M. R. (1995). Why are there returns to schooling? American Economic Review,
85(2), 153-158.
Rowley, J. (2012). Conducting research interviews. Management Research Review, 35(3), 260-
271. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409171211210154
Rubin, M., & Kilgore, R. C. (2020) Integrated care workforce development: Universitycommunity collaboration. Social Work Education, 39(4), 534-551.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2019.1661987
Ryan, K. C., & Dunn-Jensen, L. M. (2016). Stretched thin: Extra-role behavior in educational
settings. In G. Fink (Ed.), Stress: Concepts, cognition, emotion, and behavior (pp. 445-
450). Academic Press.
Sawchuk, P. H. (2003). Adult learning and technology in working-class life. Cambridge
University Press.
Schlefer, J. (1999). Wildcat service corporation and the private industry council.
http://www.jff.org/download.php/Wildcatcasestudy.pdf
Schmitter, P. C. (1979). Still the century of corporatism? In P. Schmitter & G. Lehmruch (Eds.),
Trends towards corporatist intermediation. Sage.

134
Scott, M., Eyster, L., Su, Y., Blount, D., Trutko, A., Smith, A., & Gardiner, K. (2018). The
Employer Perspectives Study: Insights on how to build and maintain strong employercollege partnerships. Round 4 TAACCCT evaluation. Report prepared for the U.S.
Department of Labor, Chief Evaluation Office.
https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/OASP/legacy/files/Employer-Perspectives-StudyReport-Round-Final.pdf
Sechelski, A. N., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2019). A call for enhancing saturation at the qualitative
data analysis stage via the use of multiple qualitative data analysis approaches. The
Qualitative Report, 24(4), 795-821.
Seidman, I. (2019). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education
and the social sciences (5th ed.). Teachers College Pres.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization.
Doubleday Dell.
Soares, L. (2010). Community college and industry partnerships. White House summit on
community colleges. http://www2.ed.gov/PDFDocs/collegecompletion/02-communitycollege-and-industry-partnerships.pdf
Spangler, M. S. (2002). Concluding observations on successful partnerships. In M. S. Spangler
(Ed.), Developing successful partnerships with business and the community (pp. 77-80).
Stahl, N. A., & King, J. R. (2020). Expanding approaches for research: Understanding and using
trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Developmental Education, 44(1), 26-
29.
Stamps, D. (1995). Community colleges go corporate. Training, 32(12), 36-43.

135
Stevens, A. H., Kurlaender, M., & Grosz, M. (2018). Career technical education and labor
market outcomes: Evidence from California community colleges. The Journal of Human
Resources. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.3368/jhr.54.4.1015.7449r2
Strikwerda, C. J. (2018, January 28). Why community colleges are good for you. The Chronicle
of Higher Education. https://www.chronicle.com/article/why-community-colleges-aregood-for-you/
Sundberg, L. L. (2002). Building partnership with businesses that make a difference. New
Directions for Community Colleges, 119, 13-20.
Sylvester, P., & Myran, S. (2020). Minding the gaps: Career Navigators as an Illustration for
supporting student growth and learning. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 44(2), 147-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2018.1560375
The Economist, 2001
Uhalde, R. (2011). Workforce development that supports economic development. Economic
Development Journal, 10(1), 42-49.
University of Connecticut. (2024). Non-degree and visiting student services.
https://nondegree.uconn.edu/
Urban Institute. (2018, October). The employer perspectives study: Insights on how to build and
maintain strong employer-college partnerships Trade Adjustment Assistance Community
College and Career Training (TAACCCT) Round 4 evaluation (DOL-ETA-14-F-00013).
https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/OASP/legacy/files/Employer-Perspectives-StudyReport-Round-Final.pdf

136
Van Dyne, L., & Ellis, J. B. (2004). Job creep: A reactance theory perspective on organizational
citizenship behavior as overfulfillment of obligations. The Employment Relationship:
Examining Psychological and Contextual Perspectives (pp. 181-205). Oxford University
Press.
Van Dyne, L., Cummings, L. L., & McLean Parks, J. (1995). Extra-role behaviors: In pursuit of
construct and definitional clarity. Research in Organizational Behavior, 17, 215-285.
Vigoda-Gadot, E. (2007). Redrawing the boundaries of OCB? An empirical examination of
compulsory extra-role behavior in the workplace. Journal of Business and Psychology,
21, 377-405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-006-9034-5
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Wiley.
Weir, M. (1992). Politics and jobs: The boundaries of employment policy in the United States.
Princeton University Press.
Wengraf, T. (2001). Qualitative research interviewing: Biographic narrative and semistructured methods. Sage.
Wohlstetter, P., Smith, J., & Malloy, C. (2005). Strategic alliances in action: Toward a theory of
evolution. Policy Studies Journal, 33(3), 419-441.
World Bank Group. (2022, June 23). What is a PPP: Defining "Public-Private Partnership."
https://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private-partnership/what-ppp-defining-public-privatepartnership
Wright-Kim, J. (2022). An update on the impacts of the community college baccalaureate. New
Directions for Community Colleges, 197, 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/cc.20497

137
Yeong, M. L., Ismail, R., Ismail, N. H., & Hamzah, M. I. (2018). Interview protocol refinement:
Fine-tuning qualitative research interview questions for multi-racial populations in
Malaysia. The Qualitative Report, 23(11), 2700-2713.
Yin, R. K. (2011). Applications of case study research. Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.
Zeiss, T. (1997). Developing the world’s best workforce: An agenda for America’s community
colleges. Community College Press.

138
APPENDIX A: STUDY INVITATION
Dear ________:
My name is Salvatrice Cummo and I am a student at the University of Southern
California working on my Doctor of Education in Organizational Change and Leadership
degree. I am conducting a research study entitled Community College Faculty Member
Perspectives in Workforce Development-Oriented Public-Private Partnerships.
The purpose of this study was to examine community college faculty perspectives
regarding participating in workforce development-oriented public-private partnerships.
The criteria to participate in this study are that:
● You are employed as a part- or full-time faculty member at the [community college].
● You are a designated faculty member within a career and technical education program.
● You have worked a minimum of 6 months at the [community college].
Your participation would involve an interview of 45-60 minutes conducted via Zoom.
The interview conversation will be video recorded.
Participation is voluntary and confidential. You would not be identified in the study and
any answrs you provid would b poold with othrs’ rsponss and rportd in
aggregate.
If you have any questions about the research study or would like to participate, please call
me at 323-547-5029 or email me at scummo@usc.edu.
I sincerely thank you for your help!
Salvatrice Cummo

139
APPENDIX B: INFORMED CONSENT FORM
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
3470 Trousdale Pkwy, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT RESEARCH
STUDY TITLE: Community College Faculty Member Perspectives of Workforce
Development-Oriented Public-Private Partnerships
PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Salvatrice Cummo
FACULTY ADVISOR: Helena Seli, PhD
You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study was to examine community college faculty perspectives regarding
participating in workforce development-oriented public-private partnerships. We hope to learn
how faculty members perceive these partnerships and what factors motivate and deter them from
participating in these partnerships. You are invited as a possible participant because you are a
part- or full-time career and technical education faculty member at [community college name].
PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
Your participation in this study will involve an a one-hour videorecorded interview via Zoom
where you were asked for your perspectives about workforce development-oriented publicprivate partnerships and what would compel or deter discourage you from participating in the
partnership. You can decline to be videorecorded and only be audiorecorded. Your participation
will last for the duration of the interview, approximately one hour.
CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.
Your data will b didntifid, password protctd, and safly stord on th rsarchr’s prsonal
computer for five years, in accordance with American Psychological Association (APA)
guidelines. Only the researcher will have access to the data in its original format, including the
vido rcordd data. Th rsarchr’s dissrtation committ mmbrs will hav accss to th

140
deidentified written transcripts of the interviews for the purpose of assisting and approving the
work of the researcher.
INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact Salvatrice Cummo by phone at (323)
547-5029 or by email at scummo@usc.edu or Helena Seli at (213) 740-6742 or
praks@rossier.usc.edu
IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

141
APPENDIX C: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Thank you for meeting with me today. My name is Salvatrice Cummo, and I am a doctoral
student in Education at the University of Southern California. I appreciate your agreeing to
participate in the study and the time you have set aside to answer some of my questions. The
interview should take about one hour.
Before we get started, I want to provide you with an overview of what we will be talking about
today and answer any questions you might have about participating in the research. This
interview is designed to gather your perspectives as a community college faculty member
regarding participating in workforce development-oriented public-private partnerships. Do you
have any questions about the study or th purpos of today’s convrsation?
Please know that everything you say here today will be kept confidential. All findings will be
analyzd and rportd in aggrgat. Any dirct quots will b attributd to “a participant,” and
no names will ever be associated with the findings. I also want to assure you that none of the data
I collect will be shared with other participants, employers, colleges, or institutions.
Do you have any questions for me?
If you have questions about your rights while taking part in this study, or you have concerns or
suggestions and you want to talk to someone other than me about the study, you may contact the
IRB at (323) 442-0114 or by email at irb@usc.edu.
During this interview, I will audio and video recording our conversation so I can accurately
capture what you share. The recording helps me focus on our conversation rather than having to
take notes. If at any time you want me to stop recording, please let me know, and you may make
commnts “off th rcord.” Your participation in all aspcts of data collction is compltly
voluntary.
May I have your permission to record and get started?
First, I would like to capture a bit of your background.
1. What are your official roles and responsibilities at this institution?
2. How long have you been employed here?
3. Please briefly tell me about your academic and work history.
Possible prompts:
● What is your educational background and when did you graduate?
● How many years of industry work experience do you have?
● How many years of teaching experience do you have?
I would like to talk with you today about workforce development and some activities going on in
the institution. Workforce development refers to policies and programs focused on helping youth
and adults build vocational knowledge and skills (Jacobs & Hawley, 2009). Often, delivery of

142
these programs occurs through the collaborative efforts of employers, educational institutions,
and private training organizations located within a specific region. Faculty members at colleges
and universities sometimes help these efforts by assessing the need for knowledge and skill
development, planning curricula, and delivering the courses.
4. Are you aware of any past or present workforce development programs in your
community or this institution?
If yes:
a. What was the initiative(s)?
b. Please tell me more.
Possible probing questions:
● What was the purpose of the initiative?
● What was the timeline of the initiative?
● What were the outcomes of the initiative?
5. Where does involvement in workforce development programs fall in relation to your
contractual job requirements?
Possible prompt: Does participation in these programs fall within or outside your faculty labor
contract?
6. Aside from contractual requirements, what do you consider to be the scope and activities
of your role as a faculty member here?
Follow-up probing questions:
● Does involvement in workforce development programs fall inside or outside
your role?
● Please explain.
7. To what extent is faculty involvement in workforce development programs encouraged or
expected in your department or this institution?
8. Has anyone asked or suggested that you participate in any workforce development
programs here?
If yes:
● Who suggested or asked?
● How did they suggest or ask?
● What was the nature of your proposed involvement?
9. On a scale of 1-10, whr 1 is “not important” and 10 is “vry important,” how important
is it for faculty to participate in workforce development programs at this institution?
Follow-up probing question: Please explain.
Now lt’s talk about how you imagin your participation unfolding, if you wr to gt involvd
in a workforce development program here.
10. What do you think would be the nature of your involvement?

143
11. What would good performance look like in this capacity?
12. On a scale of 1-10, whr 1 is “vry unlikly” and 10 is “vry likly,” how likly is it that
you would achieve good performance if in this role?
Follow-up probing questions
If answer = 1-3: What would obstruct your performance?
If answer = 4-6: Please explain.
If answer = 7-10: What would enable you to achieve this level of performance?
13. What resources would you need to participate effectively in this effort?
Follow-up probing question: Are these resources available to you?
14. What difficulties, if any, would you anticipate experiencing as part of your involvement
in this effort?
15. Overall, what do you anticipate the result of your involvement to be?
16. What rewards, whether intrinsic or extrinsic, do you anticipate experiencing as a result of
your involvement in this effort?
17. On a scale of 1-10, whr 1 is “vry unlikly” and 10 is “vry likly,” how likly is it that
you would receive the rewards you mentioned?
Follow-up probing question: Please explain.
18. On a scale of 1-10, whr 1 is “not important” and 10 is “vry important,” how important
is it to you that you receive the rewards you mentioned?
19. How would you anticipate involvement in this effort reflecting in any way on you, such
as on your status or reputation as a faculty member, your performance, or the likelihood
of renewing your contract? Please explain.
Follow-up probing question: Please explain.
20. How would you anticipate your lack of involvement in this effort reflecting in any way
on you?
Possible prompt: Such as on your status or reputation as a faculty member, your
performance, or the likelihood of renewing your contract?
Follow-up probing question: Please explain.
21. That concludes the formal questions for this interview. Is there anything else you would
like to share or think is important regarding community college faculty involvement in
workforce development programs?
Thanks so much for your responses and insights!

144
APPENDIX D: ALIGNMENT OF INTERVIEW QUESTIONS, RESEARCH
QUESTIONS, AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Research Question Conceptual Framework
Interview Question RQ1 RQ2 RQ3 ExpectancyBased
Motivation
Extra-Role
Behavior
1. What are your official roles and responsibilities at this
institution?
X X
2. How long have you been employed here?**
3. Please briefly tell me about your academic and work history.**
4. Are you aware of any past or present workforce development
programs in your community or this institution?
X X
5. Where does involvement in workforce development programs
fall in relation to your contractual job requirements?
X X
6. Aside from contractual requirements, what do you consider to
be the scope and activities of your role as a faculty member here?
X X
7. To what extent is faculty involvement in workforce development
programs encouraged or expected in your department or this
institution?
X X X
8. Has anyone asked or suggested that you participate in any
workforce development programs here?
X X X
9. On a scale of 1-10, where 1 is “not important” and 10 is “very
important,” how important is it for faculty to participate in
workforce development programs at this institution?
X X X
10. What do you think would be the nature of your involvement? X X X
11. What would good performance look like in this capacity? X
12. On a scale of 1-10, where 1 is “very unlikely” and 10 is “very
likely,” how likely is it that you would achieve good performance if
in this role?
X X
13. What resources would you need to participate effectively in
this effort?
X X
14. What difficulties, if any, would you anticipate experiencing as
part of your involvement in this effort?
X X
15. Overall, what do you anticipate the result of your involvement
to be?
X X X
16. What rewards, whether intrinsic or extrinsic, do you anticipate
experiencing as a result of your involvement in this effort?
X X

145
Research Question Conceptual Framework
Interview Question RQ1 RQ2 RQ3 ExpectancyBased
Motivation
Extra-Role
Behavior
17. On a scale of 1-10, where 1 is “very unlikely” and 10 is “very
likely,” how likely is it that you would receive the rewards you
mentioned?
X X
18. On a scale of 1-10, where 1 is “not important” and 10 is “very
important,” how important is it to you that you receive the
rewards you mentioned?
X X
19. How do you think your involvement in this effort would reflect
in any way on you, such as on your status or reputation as a faculty
member, your performance, or the likelihood of renewing your
contract? Please explain.
X X X X
20. How do you think your lack of involvement in this effort would
reflect in any way on you?
X X X X
21. That concludes the formal questions for this interview. Is there
anything else you would like to share or think is important
regarding community college faculty involvement in workforce
development programs?
X X X X X
Notes: **Asked to gather demographic information; RQ1: What are faculty perspectives regarding their participation in
workforce development-oriented PPPs relative to their role and contract within the college? RQ2: What motivates faculty
members to participate in workforce development-oriented PPPs? RQ3: What factors demotivate or obstruct faculty members
from participating in workforce development-oriented PPPs?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This exploratory qualitative case study examined community college faculty perspectives regarding participating in workforce development-oriented private-public partnerships (PPPs). Nine faculty members who teach career and technical education at the study setting were recruited and interviewed to gain their perceptions relative to participating in PPPs. The data were examined using thematic analysis. All nine participants believed that workforce-development PPPs concern arranging student internships and work experience. All nine participants stated that their motivation rests in the intrinsic sense of fulfillment and satisfaction they gain from helping students and from their belief that gaining practical work experience is central to student education and enhances students’ long-term success. Participants reported that the primary obstacle to their involvement was the lack of benefits for participating and lack of consequences for neglecting to participate in workforce development. Lack of time, bandwidth, structure, accountability, and resources additionally undermined their participation. Based on these findings, community college administrators are advised to (a) increase faculty members’ awareness that they are public servants, (b) draw explicit connections between faculty members’ natural motivations and the benefits they could gain from participating in PPPs, and instituting project management frameworks and personnel to create structure and accountability around faculty members’ involvement. Additional research is advised to examine and increase faculty members’ understanding of their role as public servants, examine successful case studies of community college faculty member involvement in workforce development to uncover helpful strategies, and explore supportive structure and accountability systems other colleges use to engage faculty members in workforce development.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Social work faculty practices in writing instruction: an exploratory study

PDF

(Re)Imagining STEM instruction: an examination of culturally relevant andragogical practices to eradicate STEM inequities among racially minoritized students in community colleges

PDF

Academic advisement practices and policies in support of Black community college students with the goal of transfer

PDF

Inclusion of adjunct faculty in the community college culture

PDF

Developing adaptive expertise among community college faculty through action inquiry as a form of assessment

PDF

“Black” workplace belonging: an examination of the lived experiences of Black faculty sense of belonging factors in community colleges

PDF

An evaluation of general education faculty practices to support student decision-making at one community college

PDF

Meeting the needs of nontraditional undergraduate students through inclusive pedagogy

PDF

Internships in the entertainment industry: From the perspectives of colleges and universities, and internship employers

PDF

Increasing representation of Black male hip-hop educators in the community colleges in California

PDF

Structures for change: involving faculty in equity-based decision-making in independent schools

PDF

The influence of executive leadership on community college completion rates

PDF

The impact of campus climate on community college student motivation

PDF

Perspectives of Native American community college students

PDF

Beyond the board room: how personal experiences and environments shape community college trustee learning

PDF

Retaining racially minoritized students in community college STEM programs

PDF

Experience of belonging for full-time hybrid physical therapy faculty

PDF

Full-time distance education faculty perspectives on web accessibility in online instructional content in a California community college context: an evaluation study

PDF

Developing and retaining employees: exploring talent management initiatives for enlisted women

PDF

Preparing university faculty for distance education: an evaluation study

Asset Metadata

Creator Cummo, Salvatrice (author)

Core Title Community college faculty member perspectives of workforce development-oriented public-private partnerships

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2024-05

Publication Date 07/09/2024

Defense Date 05/28/2024

Publisher Los Angeles, California (original), University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag career technical education,community college,faculty,internships,OAI-PMH Harvest,private public partnership,work experience,workforce development

Format theses (aat)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Seli, Helena (committee chair), Lynch, Douglas (committee member), Torres-Retana, Raquel (committee member)

Creator Email cummo@usc.edu,salvatricecummo@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC113997ESA

Unique identifier UC113997ESA

Identifier etd-CummoSalva-13180.pdf (filename)

Legacy Identifier etd-CummoSalva-13180

Document Type Dissertation

Format theses (aat)

Rights Cummo, Salvatrice

Internet Media Type application/pdf

Type texts

Source 20240709-usctheses-batch-1177 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu