The affirmative action officer is the key figure in establishing, implementing, and sustaining an affirmative action program. This study was directed toward the perceptions of actively engaged affirmative action officers in higher education. The affirmative action officers responded to their perceptions of their functions, duties, and responsibilities as these variables impacted their role in affirmative action. The purpose of this study was to focus on the actual and ideal functions, duties, and responsibilities of the affirmative action officer. More specifically, the questions that guided this study were: (1) How does the affirmative action officer view his/her role? (2) What are the prioritized functions, duties, and responsibilities of the affirmative action officer as seen from the perspective of the affirmative action officer? (3) Is there a common core of functions, duties, and responsibilities shared by affirmative action officers? If so, what are those common characteristics that ensure the probability of success in the role? A mail questionnaire was designed. The questionnaire consisted of two sections. Section I gathered information on the affirmative action officers' perceptions of their functions, duties, and responsibilities. This section was divided into seven major areas: Promotion, Personnel, Procedures, Process, Recruitment, Goals and Timetables, and Grievances. The affirmative action officers rated statements in Column I (Actual--current role) and in Column II (Ideal--what their role should be) on an eight-point scale. Section II of the questionnaire gathered demographic data from the affirmative action officers. This section was divided into three major areas: (1) Personal Data, (2) Affirmative Action Data, and (3) Present Position as Affirmative Action Officer. The questionnaire was mailed to both four- and two-year private and public institutions of higher education. Forty-five percent of the surveys were returned by the affirmative action officers. Among the conclusions drawn from the data received, the following appeared to be evident: (1) Affirmative action officers could achieve a greater maximum in the performance of their functions, duties, and responsibilities if they would be able to spend more time and effort on those items that were addressed in each of the seven major areas (Promotion, Personnel, Procedures, Process, Recruitment, Goals and Timetables, and Grievances) of the questionnaire; (2) more Whites were affirmative action officers than any other ethnic group; (3) females tend to serve as affirmative action officers than males; and (4) usually affirmative action officers were between thirty to thirty-nine years of age.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UMASS/oai:scholarworks.umass.edu:dissertations-1270 |
| Date | 01 January 1991 |
| Creators | Romero, Maria Mercedes |
| Publisher | ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst |
| Source Sets | University of Massachusetts, Amherst |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Source | Doctoral Dissertations Available from Proquest |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds