Consideration of mechanisms to establish collaborations must address fundamental questions, such as "What if they don't want to?" and "What's in it for me?" An awareness of and positive responses to both the needs and reward structure for faculty in each institution are necessary. Recently, questions and concerns regarding faculty roles and rewards have been raised throughout the post-secondary community. In 1990 Boyer helped refocus the issues, stating "[T]he most important obligation now confronting the nation's colleges and universities is to break out of the tired old teaching versus research debate and define, in more creative ways, what it means to be a scholar. It's time to recognize the full range of faculty talent and the great diversity of functions higher education must perform" (2). Within the sciences particularly, the words scholarship and research have become nearly synonymous. Faculty activities in undergraduate teaching and service have been regarded as necessary and sometimes important, but definitely of lower status than research. Most of the national interest and debate in this area has focused on research universities. Since community colleges are primarily teaching institutions, putting the issue in terms of "teaching versus research" meant it did not apply. This has often led to devaluation of faculty not involved in "research" and the broader issues of quality, articulation, and transferability. Recognizing this, along with the critical need for faculty renewal and development, some community college leaders have focused on the role of scholarship in the community college (3-5).

However, mechanisms that would establish collaborative research and scholarly activities between faculty primarily involved in research and those primarily involved in teaching are often missing in these discussions. Collaboration is often seen as unnecessary, unusual, and unnatural. The report from a National Science Foundation workshop on faculty coalitions indicated there are many studies of coalitions between business, higher education, and the K-12 community, but little information is available on bringing together different sectors of higher education (6). A quick search of the ERIC data base, using the key words "Transfer", "Collaboration", and "Two-Year-Colleges", provided only 13 potentially useful references. Three of these are directly related to ideas presented here (7-9).

Collaborations and coalitions between faculty at two- and four-year institutions must be based on mutual trust and participants must believe that the process serves their individual interests. An awareness of and positive responses to both the needs and reward structure for faculty in each institution are necessary. Leaders seeking to establish collaborations must attempt to understand the scholarly aspects of the collaborations as well as the political and fiscal implications. Some things that universities might need are increased support for research, more research colleagues, an expanded definition of scholarship, and research in support of education. Community colleges might need increased support for professional development, recognition of scholarship, curriculum, and program support, and partnerships and alliances. These lists are meant not to be inclusive, but to encourage consideration of individual faculty and institutional needs and reward structures in discussions of articulation and collaboration.

The Nevada Teaching & Research-Enhancement & Collaboration (TREC) program is an example of a collaboration that successfully addresses many of these issues. The immediate goal was to strengthen interactions between research institutions and community colleges. The mechanism is to establish collaborative research and scholarly activities between research faculty and teaching faculty. Essentially, the program identifies interested research faculty, identifies interested community college faculty, and facilitates and funds a match. It provides opportunities for community college faculty to participate in research activities with faculty members from the state's two universities and research institute. It allows the community college faculty to participate in state-of-the-art research, increase their knowledge base, and become more effective instructors. It helps support Nevada's goals for research and graduate education that is nationally competitive; meets the needs of the state, region, and nation; and enhances undergraduate education.

The TREC program grew out of a highly successful summer pilot project in 1993, which involved the pairing of community college and research faculty to develop a UV sensing device for use under Antarctic ice. As a direct result of the pilot project success, the program has grown and has supported 46 collaborations. These range from molecular orbital calculations to an investigation of student success factors in science courses and transfer from the community college to the university. Faculty interaction through TREC projects has led to research papers and presentations by community college faculty, course development, course articulation, and community college student research projects at both the community college and the research institutions. It has provided ample evidence of the benefits from establishing these collaborations.

Acknowledgments

Support for the TREC program from the National Science Foundation EPSCoR Program (grant No. OSR-9553369), the State of Nevada, and the community college presidents of the University and Community College System of Nevada is gratefully acknowledged.

Note

1. Portions of this paper were originally presented at the 14th Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, August 4-8, 1996, Clemson, SC, and printed in the 2YC₃ Newsletter 1996, 96-IV.

Literature Cited

1. Susskind, U. CHED Newsletter 1996, Fall, 88-90.

2. Boyer, E. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professorate; Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching: Princeton, NJ, 1990.

3. Mahaffey, J.; Welsh, M.F. (1993). Commun. Coll. Rev. 1993, 21(1), 31-40.

4. Fostering a Climate for Faculty Scholarship at Community Colleges; Palmer, J.; Vaughan, G., Eds.; American Association of Community and Junior Colleges: Washington, DC, 1992.

5. Williams, D. The Role of Scholarship in the Community College; ERIC Digest, ED338294; ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges: Los Angeles, 1991.

6. Cunnif, P.; Hieggelke, C.; Smith, B. Putting the Pieces Together: A Guide Book for Leaders of Coalitions of Two- and Four-Year Colleges and Universities; Prince George's Community College: Largo, MD, 1993.

7. Cejda, B.D. Commun. Coll. J. Res. Practice 1994, 18(2) 189-199.

8. Ignash, J. In the Shadow of Baccalaureate Institutions; ERIC Digest, ED348129; ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges: Los Angeles, 1992.

9. National Science Foundation Workshop on the Dissemination and Transfer of Innovation in Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education, May 1-3, 1990; ERIC Digest, ED361174; ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges: Los Angeles, 1991.