Date post: | 30-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | frank-dawson |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 0 times |
1
NC StateFaculty Well-Being Survey
College of Natural Resources:Kudos and Concerns
Presented to CNR Executive Committee
September 26, 2008
Nancy Whelchel, Ph.D.
University Planning and Analysis
http://www2.acs.ncsu.edu/UPA/survey/faculty/FWBS06.CNR.Sept26_08.ppt
2
Overview
Research design, methods, & response rates Reports available & how to interpret them CNR results
Leadership Feedback, rewards, & compensation Workload & support Department life Interests & activities
4
Survey Objectives
Provide readily accessible, “centralized” information
Collect relevant & actionable data
5
Survey Development
Advisory committee UPA, Faculty Senate, FCTL, ODAAA, HR, OEO
Feedback from EOs, VP, Deans, Faculty Senate, Legal Affairs,
IRB
Pre-tests Tenure-track faculty, lecturers, department head
7
Questionnaire Topics
Image and vision Leadership Faculty-Administration relationships Diversity/Multiculturalism Working relationships Faculty support & professional development (including contracts/grants) RPT PTR Pay & compensation Campus infrastructure Recreation/wellness Work activities Overall satisfaction
8
Population
On campus Tenure/non-tenure track faculty/lecturers
(including dept heads, music, PE, FYC, extension, clinical, research)
FTE .75 AY04-05 & AY05-06 Final population = 1,625 No sampling
9
Methods & Response Rates
Web-based Available Sept. 6 – Oct. 10, 2006 (29 days) 69.7% overall response rate (1,132 of 1,625)
[+/- 0.9 margin of error] CNR response rate 78.2% (61 of 78) [HIGHEST RR]
[+/- 2.7 MOE]
No significant differences in response rate between subgroups
11
Results & ReportsAvailable Online
(www2.acs.ncsu.edu/UPA/survey/faculty)
Executive summary (overall results) Research methods Annotated questionnaire Tables by:
Academic Profile (rank, tenure status, administrative experience) Demographic Profile (gender, race/ethnicity, citizenship, age, # years at
NC State) College
Overall results Tenure-track faculty only Rank/tenure status, # yrs employed, gender, race/ethnicity
Select presentations & topical reports Invitation for feedback
12
Interpreting Results
Everything is relative!Suggestions for what to look for:
Do responses/ratings meet pre-defined goals? (e.g., % giving a positive rating)
How do responses/ratings for individual items compare to each other?
What factors/characteristics are related to ratings? How do responses/ratings from one group of respondents
compare to another? (How have ratings changed over time?)
13
Interpreting Resultsfor This Presentation…
All respondents (including NTT) Relative to expectations
“Positive” rating > 85% ‘excellent/good,’ ‘strongly agree/agree,’ ‘very
satisfied/satisfied “Negative” rating
> 25% ‘fair/poor,’ ‘disagree/strongly disagree,’ ‘dissatisfied/ very dissatisfied’
Relative to other colleges = Among top 3 colleges = Among bottom 3 colleges
15
Department LeadershipKudos
Positive ratings for: Allowing faculty autonomy (91%) Support for academic freedom (90%)
16
Department LeadershipConcerns
Negative ratings for: Establishing clear priorities (47%) Providing needed resources (41%) Resolving internal conflict (34%) Fairly allocating resources (32%) Appreciating the role faculty contributions play in achieving the
mission of the department (30%) Making equitable decisions (26%)
17
College LeadershipKudos
Positive ratings for: Supporting academic freedom (96%) Allowing department autonomy (88%) Promoting diversity within the college (88%) Advocating for the college (85%)
18
College LeadershipConcerns (& Kudos)
Negative ratings for: Establishing clear priorities for the college (49%) Providing needed resources (43%) Allocating resources fairly (42%) Appreciating the role faculty contributions play in achieving the
mission of the college (37%) Communicating with faculty (35%) Resolving internal conflict (34%) Making equitable decisions (28%)
19
Faculty InputKudos
Positive ratings for being encouraged to provide input on:
Program assessment activities (97%) Curricular issues (95%) Department hiring/appointment decisions (92%) Decisions about allocation of resources in department (70%)
20
Faculty InputConcerns (& Kudos)
Negative ratings for: College administration seeking faculty input in vision of college
(42%) College administration incorporating faculty ideas in decision
making (42%) College administration seeking input in administrative
appointments in CNR (27%) Department administration seeking faculty input in vision of
department (25%)
21
Professional DevelopmentKudos
Positive ratings for: Opportunities to participate in teaching workshops, etc. (95%
[33% ‘very satisfied’])
22
Professional DevelopmentConcerns (& Kudos)
Negative ratings for: Funding for scholarly/professional leaves (51%) Opportunities for scholarly/professional leaves (40%) Funding to participate in teaching workshops, etc. (36%) Funding to present as scholarly/professional conferences (34%) Leadership development opportunities (31%) Opportunities for temporary teaching load reduction for
professional development (31%)
24
Performance ReviewKudos and Concerns
Positive ratings for feedback being: Appropriately based on SME (92%)
Negative ratings for feedback being: Helpful to how well doing relative to peers (47%) Given appropriate weight in merit raises (37%) Helpful to professional development (28%)
25
Rewards Concerns
Negative ratings for department rewarding excellent performance in:
Extension and engagement (37%) Service (35%) Teaching/mentoring of students (31%) Technological/managerial innovation (28%)
Negative ratings for university rewards for innovation in:
Teaching (40%) Extension/engagement/economic development (40%)
26
Compensation Concerns (& Kudos)
Negative ratings for competitiveness of salary relative to others:
In discipline at comparable institutions (52%) At NC State (55%) In discipline in UNC system (48%) In CNR (43%) In department (32%)
Negative ratings for: Understanding how salaries are determined (52%) Department linking salary to meritorious performance (35)
28
Work-related Demands Concerns
328%
1: Managing just fine
6%
218%
439%
5: Completely overwhelmed
9%
Almost half of CNR faculty say they are overwhelmed with work-related demands
82% of CNR faculty said they would change how they spend their work time
29
Stress Kudos (& Concerns)
Least likely to experience ‘a great deal’ of stress from:
Relationships with students (4%) Committee work (7%) Relationships with department faculty (7%) Relationships with college administration (9%) Self-assessment activities (10%)
30
Stress Concerns (& Kudos)
Most likely to experience ‘a great deal’ of stress from:
Workload (44%) Work/life balance (39%) Research/publication demands (32%) Institutional procedures (32%)
31
Support for 6 Realms of Faculty Responsibility
Concerns (& Kudos)
Negative ratings for University providing sufficient resources to support faculty success with:
Service (42%) Discovery of knowledge (36%) Technological/managerial innovation (36%) Extension and engagement (37%) Teaching/mentoring of students (32%)
32
TeachingKudos (& Concerns)
Positive ratings for: Discretion over course content (98%) Influence over which courses teach (86%) Level of courses teach (86% [39% ‘very satisfied’]) Number of courses teach (86% [25% ‘very satisfied’])
33
StudentsConcerns
Negative ratings for ability of students: Undergraduate student ability (22% ‘C’ or lower) Quality of undergraduate students (30%)
Experienced ‘a great deal’ of stress from: Working w/ under-prepared students (22%)
34
Support (Staff)Concerns
Negative ratings for: Department clerical/administrative support (51%) Technical assistance (44%) Support staff in college (35%) Support for technology transfer (35%) Support for assessment activities (33%)
35
Contracts & GrantsConcerns (& Kudos)
Negative ratings for: PI control over indirect costs (70%) Allocation of indirect costs to department (64%) Allocation of indirect costs to individuals (61%) Post-award support from university (35%) Pre-award support from college (31%) Post-award support from college (30%) Pre-award support from university (28%)
36
Campus Infrastructure Concerns
Negative ratings for: Availability of parking (80%) Cost of parking (77%) Amount of green space (64%) General aesthetics of campus (54%) Dining options on campus (43%) Infrastructure of buildings (41%) Lab space (37%) Building maintenance (37%) Availability of up-to-date equipment (35%) Classrooms (35%) Availability of informal meeting space (33%) Upkeep of campus grounds (28%) Office space (26%)
38
Department Image Kudos
Positive ratings for department’s national reputation for:
Extension and engagement (89%) Undergraduate education (78% positive) Graduate education (78% positive) Contribution to economic development (68%)
39
Faculty Ability & Achievements Concerns (?)
Top grade* for: Own demonstrated professional ability (44%) Demonstrated professional ability of faculty (43%) Own professional achievements (39%) Professional achievements of faculty (33%)
* % of respondents assigning a grade of “A”
40
CollegialityKudos
Positive (or relatively high) ratings to: Collegiality/inclusiveness of faculty searches (93%) Respectful dialogue between diverse perspectives (87%) “Fit” in department (85%) Relationship between faculty and department administration
(83%) Unity/cohesion among faculty (73%) Relationship between faculty and college administration (71%) Relationship between faculty and university administration (67%)
41
CollegialityKudos (& Concerns)
Give/receive help to/from other faculty in department:
Feedback on research (87%) Understanding RPT processes/expectations (82%) Department/college organization, requirements, policies (75%) Advice on teaching (70%) Issues related to work/life balance (46%)
42
CollaborationKudos
Collaborate with:: Other faculty in department (93% [77% ‘frequently’]) Non-faculty external to NC State (84% [50% ‘frequently’]) Faculty from other universities (82% [38% ‘frequently’]) Faculty in other NC State departments (79%)
43
Diversity/MulticulturalismKudos
Positive ratings for department’s efforts to recruit, support, and retain students and faculty from
underrepresented groups
44
Diversity/MulticulturalismKudos (and Concerns)
Positive ratings for department providing a working environment that is accepting and respectful of differences in:
Age, disability status, gender, military status, nationality/ethnic origin, race and color, religion
Sexual orientation
Positive ratings for department making everyone feel welcome at social events, regardless of:
Age, gender, military status, nationality/ethnic origin, religion Disability status, race and color, sexual orientation
45
VisionKudos and Concerns (?)
Optimism for future: Department will change for the better (66%) University will change for the better (49%) Department has a clear vision and is working towards it (29%)
47
Globalism / ServiceKudos
Interest in / support for international or service activities
Research,extension projects outside the US (84%) Advising international students (76%) Leading/participating in international service projects (53%) Leading/participating in Alternative Spring Break (37%) Teaching in the NC State International Studies major (37%)
48
Recreation/Wellness Kudos
Positive ratings to: Facilities at Carmichael Gymnasium (91%) Recreational space on campus (91%) Availability of recreational activities on campus (89%) Availability of cultural activities on campus (89%) ARTS NC State programs (87%) Organized Campus Recreation activities (85%)
49
Recreation/Wellness Kudos
More likely to use/participate in: Facilities at Carmichael Gymnasium (45% ‘at least once per
week’) Recreational space on campus (15% ‘at least once per week’) Organized Campus Recreation activities (30% ‘at least once per
year’)