The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 38, No. 2 & Volume 39, No. 1 - 34

Cliff Haynes • Steven M. Janosik

al component associated with the community. Compared to the traditional residence hall experience, LLPs provide residents with a more intense and intentional connection between in-class and out-of-class learning. They often have a larger staff and offer a higher level of interaction between residents, faculty, and staff (Hargrave, 2002; Jones, 2003; Winston & Anchors, 1993). Living-learning programs provide benefits for all members of these communities. Students living in LLPs report greater connection to the institution, a smoother transition to college during their first year, and greater academic and social involvement than do their non-participant peers (Henry & Schein, 1998; Inkelas & Weisman, 2003; McKelfresh, 1980). Students participating in LLPs are more likely to interact with faculty than are non-LLP students regardless of how involved in the LLP they are (Garrett & Zabriskie, 2003). However, these student benefits vary by the type of LLP in which the student is living (Clarke, Miser, & Roberts, 1988). Although much research has been conducted on benefits for students in LLPs, there has been little research on the benefits for faculty involved in LLPs (Jackson & Stevens, 1990; Sriram, Shushok, Perkins, & Scales, 2011; Tampke, 1993). Research on benefits for student affairs staff appears even less frequently. An unexplored dimension in both these areas is a comparison of the intrinsic and extrinsic benefits for faculty and staff involved in LLPs. The purpose of this study was to address this gap in the existing literature on LLPs. The increase in the workload and stress of faculty and staff has made the role of benefits for participating in additional activities increas34

ingly important (Gappa, Austin, & Trice, 2007; McCluskey-Titus, 2005). Benefits can be in the form of extrinsic incentives (e.g., salary, travel funds, clerical support) or intrinsic incentives (e.g., increased knowledge of pedagogy, positive working relationships, greater connection to the institution). While both faculty and staff often choose their careers for the intrinsic benefits more than the extrinsic ones, these benefits work best when there is a variety of incentives that are related closely to professional motivation factors (Baldwin & Krotseng, 1985; Bowen, 1985; Froh, Menges, & Walker, 1993; Hirt, 2006). The topic of benefits for faculty and staff involved in learning communities is important in understanding their motivation for involvement in these communities. First, faculty involved in LLPs gain a new insight into the contemporary college student, having a new and fuller understanding of the contemporary collegiate experience and seeing students from non-stereotypical, less formal, and multidimensional perspectives (Jackson & Stevens, 1990; Smith, 1994). Second, faculty involved in LLPs interact with students in ways that are atypical of the normal classroom relationship. They may hold conversations with students about topics that may normally be uncomfortable or taboo and can channel students into productive endeavors to integrate in-class and out-of-class learning (Jackson & Stevens). Finally, faculty involved in LLPs see positive effects on other aspects of their jobs, such as rekindling their enthusiasm for their work (Jackson & Stevens). Their experience in team teaching and in collaborating with faculty from other disciplines leads them to experiment with innovative teaching strategies in

THE JOURNAL OF COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY STUDENT HOUSING
The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 38, No. 2 & Volume 39, No. 1

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Journal of College and University Student Housing - Volume 38, No. 2 & Volume 39, No. 1
