Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the...
-
Upload
duane-cuthbert-fisher -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
2
Transcript of Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the...
![Page 1: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Retention Survey ReportSubmitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004
Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004
Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee, PACWC (2001/2-2003/4)
Randi Koeske, Ph.D., Chair
Nicole Constable, Ph.D.
Kim Needy, Ph.D.
![Page 2: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Survey TimelineSpring, 2003 Survey developed; sample identifiedMay, 2003 Survey e-mailedJuly, 2003 Returns completed (42.9%)August, 2003 Analyses, draft report completedOctober, 2003 Progress report circulatedJanuary, 2004 Draft report, Executive Summary
circulated and discussedFebruary, 2004 Subcommittee recommendations,
additional analyses/corrections suggestedMarch, 2004 Report/Summary approved by PACWCMay, 2004 Report/Summary presented to Provost
![Page 3: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Sample
Target: faculty at all campuses who left between 2000-2002 (not Medical School) N=4921 survey respondents (42.9%)Demographic breakdown:
- 71.4% female- 85.7% white- 85.7% Oakland campus (2 from UPJ, 1 from UPG)- 42.9% tenured, 100% in tenure stream- 57.1% assistant, 9.5% associate, 33.3% full professors
![Page 4: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Primary Measures
26 ratings (5-point rating scales)2 open-ended questionsSelected demographics (identities confidential)
Mean ratings and SDs % of respondents giving rating ≥ 3Comments coded into 90 themes, 10 categories
![Page 5: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Top 5 Reasons for Leaving Pitt
Reason Mean SDAttraction to other university or department
3.90 1.58
Problems-deficiencies at Pitt or in department
3.85 1.63
Intellectual community-collegiality 3.43 1.57
Working conditions 3.05 1.62
Opportunities for autonomy-growth 2.90 1.84
Ratings were made on 5-point scales: 1 = not at all important to 5 = very important
![Page 6: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Interpretation
Professional issues most importantCompensation mattered, especially when seen as– undervaluing or misuse– part of mishandled priorities– sign of indifference
Salary over time/retention package lack of perceived merit or commitment
![Page 7: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Top 5 Reasons for Leaving Pitt
Reason Percent ≥ 3Attraction to other university or department
80.9%
Problems-deficiencies at Pitt or in department
80.0%
Intellectual community-collegiality 71.4%
Working conditions 63.2%
Salary-benefits 55.0%
Percentages reflect those giving ratings of 3 = moderately important to 5 = very important
![Page 8: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Interpretation
Leaving resulted from a combination of factors
Considerable variability across individuals
![Page 9: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Overall Equity-Relevant Ratings
Reason Mean SDEquity for all relative to field 3.29 1.31
Equity for all within department 3.18 1.59
Importance of atmosphere for women as a reason for leaving
2.50 1.76
Importance of employment for spouse/partner as a reason for leaving
2.45 1.88
Importance of salary for women as a reason for leaving
2.18 1.55
Ratings 1 = not at all equitable to 5 = very equitable; 1 = not at all important to 5 = very important
![Page 10: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Interpretation
Pitt seen as moderately equitable overallGender issues top-rated among diversity concerns as reasons for leaving
- atmosphere for women- employment opportunities for spouse/partner- salary for women
![Page 11: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Overall Equity-Relevant Ratings
Reason Percent ≥ 3
Equity for all relative to field 76.4%
Equity for all within department 64.6%
Importance of atmosphere for women as a reason for leaving
44.5%
Importance of employment for spouse/partner as a reason for leaving
40.0%
Importance of salary for women as a reason for leaving 35.3%
Percentages of 3 = moderately equitable to 5 = very equitable; 3 = moderately important to 5 = very important
![Page 12: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Interpretation
Gender, race, sexual orientation, age, and disability were not primary overall concernsGender was important to a subgroup of females
- overall gender comparisons- exploratory analysis- analysis of comments
![Page 13: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Exploration - Comments
Comments helped to clarify ratings– male-only bathrooms– female-offensive behavior not addressed– administrative advancement less open to women– failure to address employment of spouse/partner (6 or 28.5%)
– poor maternity leave options (1990, 1995)
![Page 14: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Exploration – Gender Differences
Focus on equity ratings, diversity-related concerns as reasons for leaving– overall gender difference (p < .08): employment opportunities
for spouse or partner
– compared % of male and female respondents with ratings of moderate to high importance (≥ 3)
– examined gender differences in patterns of response
![Page 15: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Individual Ratings
Importance of employment for spouse/partner as a reason for leaving
Mean SD
Males 1.33 0.82
Females 2.93 2.02
Percent ≥ 3
Males 16.7%
Females 50.0%
Ratings 1 = not at all important to 5 = very important
![Page 16: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Pattern of Ratings (Percent ≥ 3)
Rating Males Females
Perceived equity in department 80.0% 58.3%
Importance as reason for leaving Males Females Problems/deficiencies in department 66.7% 85.7%
Conflict with individual(s) 33.3% 57.1%
Research support-funding 40.1% 57.1%
Employment opportunities – spouse/partner 16.7% 50.0%
Atmosphere for women 33.3% 46.7%
Respect for/centrality of expertise 33.3% 46.7%
Percentages reflect those giving ratings of 3 = moderately important to 5 = very important
![Page 17: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Pattern of Ratings (Percent ≥ 3) (continued)
Importance as reason for leaving Males Females Salary for women 0% 42.8%
Mode of evaluation 0% 40.0%
Atmosphere for other diversity groups 0% 23.1%
Atmosphere for people of color 0% 21.3%
Salary for people of color 0% 20.0%
Salary for other diversity groups 0% 10.0%
Salary-benefits 83.3% 42.9%
Opportunities for promotion 66.7% 40.0%
Level of student ability-motivation 60.0% 26.7%
Percentages reflect those giving ratings of 3 = moderately important to 5 = very important
![Page 18: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Interpretation
Male and female faculty differed in pattern of response
All females did not express same concernsMore important among women:– dual career issues – issues related to equity and diversity
![Page 19: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Satisfaction with Handling of Leave
Mean SD
At the department level 3.00 1.45
At the Dean’s level 2.52 1.72
Percent ≥ 3
At the department level 63.2%
At the Dean’s level 42.8%
Ratings 1 = not at all important to 5 = very important
![Page 20: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Comments
Top 3 areas in which comments were offered:– department/school (52.7%)– women’s issues (47.3%)– attraction to offer elsewhere (42.2%)
Female faculty commented more often on– women’s issues– administration’s handling of departure– professional issues– salaries/benefits
![Page 21: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Study Limitations
Importance of diversity concerns apart from gender unknown
PACWC connection?
Larger samples, improved response rate, analysis of comparable data over time
![Page 22: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Conclusions
Faculty may explore other positions to “test waters”
“Window of opportunity” for retention
Diversity is a valuable institutional structure; differences not always merely personal – pay attention/build climate
Attend to absolute salary level over time
Dual career accommodation and a positive atmosphere for women the retention of female faculty
![Page 23: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Recommendations
Exit interviews and/or regular surveys
Address dual career needs and other climate issues for women faculty; Action Plan with monitoring
Review salaries, salary increments, benefits, lab space, support, etc. by group; assume proactive role
Work supportively with other efforts to improve status of women, e.g., Senate Plenary on Women committee
![Page 24: Retention Survey Report Submitted March 22, 2004; corrections March 29, 2004 Presented to the Provost on May 28, 2004 Recruitment and Retention Subcommittee,](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062718/56649e7d5503460f94b7ff4e/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)