FACULTY AND ALUMNI This portion of the research was completed by a group of colleagues (Morris et al). The goal of this research was to determine how faculty and alumni perceive the Gerontology Program offered by Cal State Fullerton. The faculty and alumni perspective gives a much needed insight as to where improvements can be made. The Alumni survey received 17 responses, while the Faculty survey received 10 responses. Both surveys returned a wide variety of responses, with many different aspects of the Gerontology program highlighted. After reviewing the responses from the Gerontology Department faculty and alumni, the department is in dire need of a top to bottom makeover. Students and faculty alike are in agreement that the course curriculum and strategies to increase enrollment are in need of change.
Alumni From the student perspective, the key advantage of pursuing an MSG was the ability to take the course while simultaneously being employed full time. A low level of difficulty in the course material, and only 30 unit requirement for a Masters were definite benefits for the students during their time of enrollment. However, once graduated the alumni would have preferred classes that concentrated on specific fields of study like service work for social workers and caregivers. Additionally they would have appreciated classes that covered current policies that affect senior citizens like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Medi-Cal. It appears that a large number of graduates enter into the health care and caregiving fields of employment and courses specifically designed to prep students for these types of careers are needed (Morris et al). Faculty Many of the respondents stated that the program was effective, but could have focused on more disciplines within the field. Respondents believed that dedicated staff and the knowledge gained were the program’s most important strengths, however, lack of funding, lack of faculty, lack of marketing, lack of challenge, and lack of awareness were all weaknesses cited by faculty respondents. A variety of responses were given for improving the program, but the most popular recommendation was to improve marketing of the program. Modification of curriculum, limiting part-time faculty, licensing to create Gerontology jobs, and encouraging Gerontology as a minor were all suggestions also given by respondents (Morris et al).
8