You are on page 1of 3

1.

Title of Research:
A Study of Faculty Job Satisfaction And Its Impact On Student Satisfaction In Management Institutes

2. Introduction:
Nowadays as we know that the wealth or poverty of nation depends on the quality of higher education. As we know that higher education system, determine the career path of youth and in turn the future of the country. The Stakeholder of the institutes involves student, parents, teachers, staff and society. So faculty play very important role in student development if faculty are not satisfied from their jobs then how they can performs their duties in well manners so we have to find out the problem of their jobs satisfaction so that we conduct the study about the jobs satisfaction of faculty obviously when they satisfied from their jobs then its impact on students good so they will show positive output they will participate in nation development.

3. Objectives of Research:
I. To identify the criteria of having satisfied faculty members and its positive impacts on student satisfaction level. II. To identify and understand factors affecting faculty job satisfaction, retention and attrition in management institutes. III. To identify factors affecting students performance and satisfaction level in management institutes.

4. Problem Statement:
My problem area is job satisfaction of faculty obviously when over employee or faculty members are not satisfied then over student will not satisfied so that their outcome will be negative the impact will also not satisfactory. So we try to find out the actual reasons actual problem why faculty members are not satisfied. Most of the research on job satisfaction is related to industrial or business organization; and even if faculty job satisfaction has been studied earlier, unfortunately not much attention is drawn towards studying the influence of having satisfied faculty upon student satisfaction level in education institutes. Deal with faculty shortage: In order to survive, management institutes have to face several challenges and faculty crisis is perhaps the most critical. The current and predicted shortages of competent faculty members can go from concern to crises in coming decades. Faculty job satisfaction can improve faculty retention rate and arrest attrition rate. 5. Literature Reviews: Prepared for the University of Alaska Anchorage It should be noted that two of these surveys, the NCHEMS Institutional Performance Survey and the Noel-Levitz Institutional Priorities Survey, are not designed primarily to measure the job satisfaction of faculty and/or staff. The Institutional Performance Survey measures job satisfaction as one part of a larger focus on institutional effectiveness. The Noel-Levitz Institutional Priorities Survey focuses on how important employees of an institution believe it is that their institution meets

student expectations regarding a variety of college services and experiences, as well employees level of agreement that their institution is meeting these expectations. Tomanek, Jody Kristine, "Job satisfaction of community college adjunct faculty at Midwestern Community College" (2010). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Paper 11640. Adjunct faculty constitutes the majority of faculty in higher education. Their large numbers make them a force in community colleges and four-year universities. The role that adjunct faculty play is impressive and their role should not be overlooked. Studying the background of adjunct faculty assists in providing an overview of gender, age, and ethnicity amongst adjunct faculty. College administrators and support professionals can benefit from understanding the levels of support adjunct faculty expect and their satisfaction with support that already exists in community colleges. The overall level of job satisfaction of adjunct faculty also assists college personnel in understanding adjunct faculty. Three theoretical frameworks of job satisfaction can be identified in the literature (Green 2000). Framework one is based on content theories of job satisfaction. Content theorists assume that fulfillment of needs and attainment of values can lead to job satisfaction (Locke, 1976). Framework two is grounded in process theories of job satisfaction. Process theorists assume that job satisfaction can be explained by investigating the interaction of variables such as expectancies, values, and needs (Gruneberg, 1979). Framework three is rooted in situational models of job satisfaction (Thompson & McNamara, 1997). Situational theorists assume that the interaction of variables such as task characteristics, organizational characteristics, and individual characteristics influences job satisfaction (Hoy & Miskel, 1996). Locke and Lathan's (1976) defined job satisfaction as a "pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of ones job or job experience. Many experts believe that job satisfaction is not only an indicator of overall individual well-being (Diaz-Serrano and Cabral Vieira, 2005), but also a good predictor of intentions or decisions of employees to leave a job (Gazioglu and Tansel, 2002).

6. Research Methodology:
Survey Methods the primary data for study was collected from two important sources of management institution by Questionnaires. By distribution of questionnaires we conduct data and also used different Statistical techniques and tools like variance, mean, correlation, Regression, T test Z test to analyze data with the help of population sample from education sectors. By this techniques we can conduct proper research about our topic and analyze

7. Conclusion: It can be concluded that salary is not primary but the secondary determinant of
job satisfaction for faculty in todays knowledge economy. This is in agreement with a Fuhrmann (2006) study which stated that although money is an influential factor at every stage but it is not necessary that money alone can increase motivation of every worker. There are intangibles (for instance growth & development, recognition and feedback) that are primary motivators for the workers inspiration to perform effectively. Salary does not always provide adequate recognition or ensure contentment (Nienhuis, 1994). Some research suggests that

perceived equity of pay may be a more important determinant of commitment and satisfaction than basic level of pay (Mowday, 1982). Lack of professional development, time and support provided for research activities were factors responsible for highest dissatisfaction. In this fast changing economy, faculty members today thrive for professional growth and development to secure better positions in future. As most respondents were working on contract basis, the assurance of permanent job and job security could also compensate for lower pay. Here we conclude that if we research properly about faculty satisfaction and compensate them and motivate them by salary package incentive moral satisfaction. May they will satisfied and their impact will be definitely positive and students also will be satisfied from them.

8. References:
1. Prepared for the University of Alaska Anchorage Hanover Research presents a discussion of faculty and staff satisfaction surveys. (P 202.756.2971 F 866.808.6585) 2. Tomanek, Jody Kristine, "Job satisfaction of community college adjunct faculty at Midwestern Community College" (2010). GraduateTheses and Dissertations. Paper 11640. 3. Ali Kara, Pennsylvania State University-York Campus Oscar W. DeShields, Jr., California State University, Northridge 4. Adee Athiyaman, (1997), Linking student satisfaction and service quality perceptions: the case of university education, European Journal of Marketing, 31(7), 528540. 5. Radhakanta Gartia and Jagannath Das, HE in India: A Reality Check, University News, 47(02), 2009, 12-18. 6. Barry Bozeman, Monica Gaughan, Job Satisfaction among University Faculty: Individual, Work, and Institutional Determinants, The Journal of Higher Education, 82 (2), 2011, 154-186. 7. Mussie Tessema, Kathryn Ready, Wei-Choun, Factors Affecting College Students Satisfaction with Major Curriculum: Evidence from Nine Years of Data, International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(2), 2012, 34-44