The purposes of the study : 1. To study the faculty development functions in practice at present of the rectors of teachers’ Colleges. 2. To study the faculty development behavior of the rectors of Teachers’ Collages. 3. To compare the rectors’ and instructors’ opinions regarding faculty development functions and behavior of the rectors of Teachers’ Colleges. Hypothesis : 1. The opinions between the rectors and instructors regarding the faculty development functions of the rectors of Teachers’ Colleges do not differ. 2. The opinions between the rectors and instructors regarding the faculty development behavior of the rectors of Teachers’ Colleges do not differ. Procedures : used in this research was composed of two groups of persons : 34 rectors and 404 instructors in Teachers’ Colleges, totaling 438 people from 34 Teachers’ Colleges. The instruments used in this study were two forms of questionnaires including a check-list and a rating scale. These instruments included items about the status of the sample populations, six areas of questions concerning the faculty development behavior of the rectors of Teachers’ Colleges. Four hundred forty-eight copies of the questionnaires were distributed and four hundred thirty-eight completed copies (97.76%) were returned. He data were analyzed by using percentages, means, standard deviations, and the t-test. Finding and conclusions :
1. The opinions concerning the faculty development functions of the rectors in the six areas including (1) in-service training, seminars, further study and providing academic lectures; (2) producing of instructional materials. Articles and textbooks; (3) producing of research and academic experimentation programs; (4) observation, visitation, co- teaching and fieldtrips; (5) project groups and committee working The sampling groups; (6) academic climate motivation and other beneficial activities, as performed by the rectors, the opinions are at the below average level. 2. In the five areas of faculty development including (1) display of initiative and improvement ; (2) help and coordination; (3) recognition and motivation; (4) socialization and pursuasion ; (5) physical, mental, and emotional behavioral expression; as shown by the rectors, the opinions of the rectors are at the above average level, especially in the last area in which the opinions are at the superior level. The instructors’ opinions are at the below average level, except in the last area in which their opinions are at the above average level. 3. The opinions between the rectors and instructors in both the faculty development function and the faculty development behavior of the rectors in Teachers’ Colleges are significantly different at the 0.01 level.
