gender differential paper IJCRB

ijcrb.webs.com
JUNE 2011
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY RESEARCH IN BUSINESS VOL 3, NO 2
compilation, collation and presentation of documents (i.e. exhibits, program complements, etc.).
The fact that all documents in Arabic text were not required to be translated was appreciated by
faculty.
8. Recommendations
One of the major grievances was the increased accreditation workload imposed on faculty and
the resultant stress and anxiety. This also had implications for loss of teaching time. It would in
future be more appropriate to “second” certain members from faculty to attend solely to
accreditation work. The secondment period would of course be of limited duration (perhaps 4-6
months) during which time these selected members would concentrate on all matters related to
accreditation. Criteria for selection could be decided by management in consultation with
faculty. The teaching load of these seconded individuals could be shared amongst other members
of the relevant department. The remainder of faculty could play a more supportive role to the
core members in charge of accreditation. This support could range from suggestions at stipulated
report-back meetings, preparation of documentation, networking with sources outside the
college, etc. In this way, stress is relieved and teaching/learning, which is the essence of the
college, proceeds as normal with any possible disruption being reduced to an absolute minimum.
This arrangement would also obviate the charge that some faculty members are overburdened
while others are not under any pressure. It would be up to management and the seconded faculty
to work out a schedule whereby the accreditation workload is more or less evenly distributed.
The principles which ought to guide deployment of staff could be the following: fairness,
strategic considerations vis-à-vis individual strengths, transparency, and a spirit of give and take.
Allied to the above point is the issue of an incentives program for accreditation work. Faculty
members were aggrieved at the financial remuneration/compensation received at the end of the
process. If the institution is unable to make monetary rewards available, other benefits could
include:
• Likelihood of being part of a staff exchange program
• Inclusion in other professional development programs
• Modest subsidization of travel/transport
• Extension of leave benefits
• Assistance with technology (laptops, cellular phones, etc.).
One very obvious shortcoming was the lack of student involvement in the whole accreditation
process. Members from the COE team did have informal discussions/interviews with a few
selected students, and even chats on a social level. However, the larger student population was
completely uninvolved with the whole accreditation exercise. What are students’ needs and to
what extent can these needs be fulfilled as a result of accreditation? What do students see as the
tangible benefits of accreditation for themselves, individually and on a collective level?
Although students were informed about the whole notion of accreditation, and what is involved
therein, they need to be included in a much more formal way by the institution and COE. In
addition to student exchange programs, learners need to see in concrete terms what has been
added on or amended in the institution as a result of accreditation. Student involvement can be
much more intense if the institution embarks on a leadership training campaign where students
COPY RIGHT © 2011 Institute of Interdisciplinary Business Research 694