The Degree of Faculty Practice for Emotional Intelligence from Their Points of Views

The study aimed at investigating the degree of faculty practice for emotional intelligence from their point of views. The sample of the study consisted of 153 faculties from Tafila Technical University (TTU). The researcher developed an emotional intelligence practices scale. The results indicated that the faculty practices of emotional intelligence were mid. There were statistically significant differences in practicing emotional intelligence attributed to college in favor of: humanity colleges, faculty with more than 7 year experience, and faculty whose their academic rank were associate prof. and prof. The result also indicated that the interaction between academic rank and experience was statistically significant in favor of associate prof and prof with less than 7 year experience.


Introduction and Literature Review
Emotional Intelligence (EI) is considered to be the last type of intelligences that appeared in the field of educational psychology. It plays a great role in human life because it enables us to adapt with life situations and provides different methods to solve our problems (Alwan, 2011). The history of EI refers to the works of Mayer and salvoey (1990), when they examined the individual differences in EI and they found that individuals differ in their EI abilities and the way they express their emotions and react to the others emotions. The emotionally intelligent people have the ability to monitor his and the others feelings; and this enables him to control his behavior (Johnson, 2008;George, 2000). The study of EI raised from: individuals differ in their emotional skills according to the individual differences, and this type of intelligence was not included in the intelligence measures. EI is correlated with many variables such as, personality, mode, social skills, and adaptation to life (Rfou, 2011). Alamarat (2014) indicated that EI is a dominated force that controls human negative and positive abilities.
EI became an important issue in industrial, administrative, educational and military establishments because social and emotional abilities form the basics of the individuals thinking and cognitive skills which will be converted and translated into work power, productivity and success (Rfou, 2011;Alharahsha, 2013). The availability of EI in the academic leader makes him able to realize the organization climate to perform the job tasks efficiently, and establishes good social relations with students. According to that, the students become more motivated, and achieve the learning goals (Allawzi, 2012). Goleman (1995) introduced EI model which consists of 5 dimensions: self awareness of emotions, self regulation of emotions, self organization of emotions, motivation, and sympathy and social skills. Livenson (1999) suggested another model for EI: emotional awareness, feeling control, trust and consciousness, integration and responsibility, and sensitivity to the others need. Bur-on (2006) divided EI into the following 5 dimensions: personal, social, adaptation, stress management and general mode.  Machera, R. and Machera, P. (2017) investigated the extent that students in higher education are presently exposed to emotional intelligence techniques as part of their curriculum. A survey and a qualitative approach were used to gather data from the students at Botho University who are enrolled in the Bsc Hons in Accounting. The results reflected that it was imperative to introduce a module on emotional intelligence in higher education. This module assists students in modifying their negative behavior and attitudes. Therefore, if this module is implemented well the academic performance in higher education especially at Botho University may be improved.

Statement of the Problem
EI is considered to be one of the most important intelligences for the academic leaders, because they display different kinds of leadership patterns inside classroom and they face many challenges that need EI skills. Cooper and Swaf (1997) indicated that the leaders who practice EI were more successful, and had strong social intelligence compared to the leaders with less EI.
According to the researcher experience as chair of Educational Psychology Department, vice dean, dean and a member of many committees in the university, he felt that there is a problem among a faculty in dealing with students emotions; which could be due to low level of EI among faculties, so the idea of this study was emerged to investigate the degree of EI skills among Tafila Technical University (TTU) faculty members. Precisely this study aimed to answer the following questions: Q1: What is the degree of EI practice among TTU faculty members from their perspectives?
Q2: Are their statistically significant differences (α=0.05) in practicing EI from faculties at TTU attributed to their gender, academic rank, and college?

Study Importance
The importance of the study could be clarified through the following: -It Highlights the EI and its effect in providing academic environment characterized by love and cooperation.
-It Explore the degree of practicing EI among faculty.

Procedural Definitions
Emotional Intelligence (EI): the ability of the individual to realize, control and organize his and others emotions (Mayer & Salvovey, 1995).

Study Limits
The study is limited to the following: -The study was conducted using a sample of faculties from TTU during the 2nd semester 2016/2017.

-
The results of the study depend on the reliability and validity of the EI scale used to collect data.

Design
The study adopted the descriptive design because it is a suitable method for this study purposes.

Population
The population of the study consisted of all faculties at T.T.U (238), during the 2nd semester 2016/2017 as Table 1 shows.

Sample
64% of the population (153 faculties) was chosen using stratified sample method, as shown in Table 2.

Validity
Validity of the scale was approved through expert judgments, 8 experts in educational management, measurement and evaluation, and general management were asked to review the scale, according to their notes the instrument was modified.

Reliability
Reliability was checked using internal consistency (Cronbach α equation). Table 3 represents the findings.  Table 3 the reliability coefficients were valid and acceptable.

Statistical Procedure
SPSS was used for data entry and data analysis, the following statistics were calculated: means, standard deviations and MANOVA. The following criteria were used to describe the mean for items and domains: 1-2.33 low, 234-3.67 mid and 3.68-5 high.

Results for Question 1
To answer Q1 (what is the degree of EI practices among T.T.U faculty members from their perspectives?) Means and standard deviations were used, Table 4 represents the findings.  while the use of emotions domain had the lowest mean.
The results reflect the homogeneity of the sample, because the degree of EI domains was close in their means, it also resulted from the homogeneity in the university environment; which makes faculty use emotions in a similar way.
The results are similar to the findings of Allawzi (2012), but it differs from the results of Rfou (2011) which indicated that the EI was high. The means and standard deviations were computed to the items of each domain. Table 5 represents the findings for the items of social communication domain. solve their problems, this result is supported also by psychological theories which state that: if you understand the emotions of the others, you will be able to make successive relations with them. Means and standard deviations for emotion management were computed. Table 6 represents the findings. 3.32 1.20 6 mid As shown in Table 6 item 6 had a high mean, while the rest of the items had mid means. The result could be due to the workshops that are conducted by Faculty Development Center at TTU about the skills of teaching, classroom management, understanding students' behaviors, and communication skills. Table 7 represents the findings for sympathy domain. Item (23) had the highest mean, while the other items had mid mean, the result of this domain could be explained by the commitment of faculty in ethics that all teaching members must practice during their work at the university. The results for management use were represented in Table 8. As shown in Table 8, item 7 had the highest mean (3.79), then item 9, the items 8, 12, 11, 10 and 13 had mid mean; the reason behind that could be due to the importance of sympathetic relations between faculty and students, faculty usually treat students as if they are their brothers, sisters or sons in addition to the social relations resulted from culture and religion. Faculty is to human being who implements emotions in transferring knowledge to the students, so they can motivate them to increase their achievement.

Results for Question 2
Are their statistically significant differences (α=0.05) in practicing EI from faculty at TTU attributed to their gender, academic rank, and college? To answer Q 2 , descriptive statistics and MANOVA were used; Tables 9 and 10 represent the findings.  Table 9 indicated that faculty from humanity colleges (Prof and Associate Prof) had the highest means.  As Table 10 shows faculty (Prof and Associate Prof) with less than 7 years experience had the highest means in emotional intelligence domains. Table 11 represents the means and standard deviations for emotional intelligence according to college and experience.  Table 11 indicated that humanity college faculty with more than 7 years experience had the highest means. In order to examine if the differences in means were significant MANOVA was used, Table 12 represents the findings.  Table 12 showed that there are statistically significant differences (α=0.05) in emotional intelligence attributed to the interaction between: rank* college, rank* experience and rank* college* experience. Table 13 shows MANOVA for the effect of the bi interaction between rank and experience upon emotional intelligence domains.  Table 13 showed that there are statistically significant differences in all emotional intelligence domains attributed to: interaction of college with academic rank, interaction between academic rank and experience, and interaction between college and experience in favor of: faculty from humanity colleges whose rank are Prof and Associate Prof, Prof and Associate Prof whose experience is less than 7 years, and faculty from humanity colleges whose experience is 7 years and more. In favor of humanity colleges faculty whose ranks are Prof and Associate Prof, there are statistical significant differences in all emotional domains attributed to faculty rank, college and experience.
The result could be attributed to the nature of humanity colleges which concentrate on humanity relations and life skills which enhance the mutual trust between individuals through respectful communication and taking into consideration humanity emotions, this type of relation did not exist in the scientific colleges which concentrate on figures, equations and scientific theories. The results indicated that faculty with higher academic ranks and more experience had more emotional intelligence; this could be due to the accumulated experience which enable them to be familiar and experts in their students feelings, control their emotions, applied emotions in teaching process and realize the importance of emotions as a life skill. The results are similar to the findings of Alrabei (2007) and Alharahshah (2013).

Recommendations
According to the results of study, the researcher recommends the following: universities should hold workshops about emotional intelligence and how to implement it in teaching process, especially for faculty of scientific colleges.

Conclusion
Emotional intelligence among faculty was mid and it was affected by faculty experience, rank and the college they are teaching at.