State of the Faculty Survey

29
State of the Faculty Survey Philip C. Wander President of the Faculty Senate LMU March 18 2010

description

State of the Faculty Survey. Philip C. Wander President of the Faculty Senate LMU March 18 2010. When was the survey conducted?. March 5 – 11, 2010 In one week. What’s the response rate?. 368 faculty members received the survey 121 responded The response rate was 33%. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of State of the Faculty Survey

Page 1: State of the Faculty Survey

State of the Faculty Survey

Philip C. WanderPresident of the Faculty Senate LMU

March 18 2010

Page 2: State of the Faculty Survey

When was the survey conducted?

March 5 – 11, 2010In one week

Page 3: State of the Faculty Survey

What’s the response rate?

368 faculty members received the survey121 responded

The response rate was

33%

Page 4: State of the Faculty Survey

Who responded to the survey?

Page 5: State of the Faculty Survey

Women 44%

Men 56%

Page 6: State of the Faculty Survey

Age

49

Page 7: State of the Faculty Survey

# of dependents

2

Page 8: State of the Faculty Survey

Race African American 2%

Asian 6% Multiracial 6%

Hispanic/Latino 13%

White 73%

Page 9: State of the Faculty Survey

Rank

Associate professor 23%

Assistant professor 32%

Full Professor 45%

Page 10: State of the Faculty Survey

College

Education 7% Film & Television 8%

Communication & Fine Arts 13% Business 14% Science & Engineering 15%

Bellarmine 45%

Page 11: State of the Faculty Survey

What did faculty tell us?

Page 12: State of the Faculty Survey

Who responded to the survey?

Page 13: State of the Faculty Survey

Senate Communication

with Faculty

Page 14: State of the Faculty Survey

Senate Communication effectiveness mean score = 3

1-------------2-------------3-------------4-------------5

X

Page 15: State of the Faculty Survey

Let us guess …

In senate communication with faculty

which of the following works the worst?

Which the best?

Page 16: State of the Faculty Survey

Form of Communication

Listening Session

Faculty Senate Website

E-mails

Newsletter

Personal comm with senator(s)

Page 17: State of the Faculty Survey

Form of Senate Communication

Mean ScoreRanking in

Communication Effectiveness

Listening Session 2.47 4

Faculty Senate Website 2.21 5

E-mails 3.96 1

Newsletter 2.73 3

Personal comm with senator(s)

3.31 2

3.00

Page 18: State of the Faculty Survey

Faculty knowledge of what the senate

accomplished

Page 19: State of the Faculty Survey

Let us guess again …

Which of the following senate accomplishment

faculty has the least knowledge of?

And the most knowledge of?

Page 20: State of the Faculty Survey

# Faculty Senate Accomplished Item 2009-2010

1 Faculty Representation in the Core Revision

2Rank and Tenure Independent Review Committee Process

3 Faculty Handbook revision regarding Clinical Faculty

4Approval of the Undergraduate Learning Goals and Outcomes

5Accepting the report and recommendations from the GreenTrans Subcommittee

6Adopting the Governance Committee’s recommendations on the Regular and Periodic Evaluation of Academic Administrators.

7Formation of the Committee on the Comprehensive Evaluation of Teaching

Page 21: State of the Faculty Survey

# AnswerFaculty

Knowledge Ranking

% of Faculty

who knew

1 Faculty Representation in the Core Revision 2 63%

2 Rank and Tenure Independent Review 1 80%

3Faculty Handbook revision re. Clinical Faculty

4 27%

4Approving Undergraduate Learning Goals & Outcomes

6 18%

5Accepting the GreenTrans Subcommittee Report

7 8%

6Regular & Periodic Evaluation of Academic Administrators.

5 22%

7Forming Committee on Comprehensive Teaching Evaluation

3 28%

Page 22: State of the Faculty Survey

What is faculty satisfaction with

Senate representing them?

Page 23: State of the Faculty Survey

Senate representativenessmean score = 3

1-------------2-------------3-------------4-------------5

X

Page 24: State of the Faculty Survey

One last guess…

Which of the following 3 items

harbor the highest faculty anxiety?

Page 25: State of the Faculty Survey

# Faculty Anxiety Area

1 Climate Issues

2 Faculty Mentoring

3 Faculty Governance

4 Recruitment of tenure track faculty

5 Recruitment of part-time/clinical faculty

6 Rank and Tenure

7 Core Curriculum

8 Pre-Tenure retention review practice

Page 26: State of the Faculty Survey

# Faculty Anxiety AreaAnxietyRanking

%

1 Climate Issues 4 41%

2 Faculty Mentoring 7 27%

3 Faculty Governance 1 63%

4 Recruitment of tenure track faculty 6 33%

5 Recruitment of part-time/clinical faculty 8 15%

6 Rank and Tenure 3 57%

7 Core Curriculum 2 60%

8 Pre-Tenure retention review practice 5 34%

Page 27: State of the Faculty Survey

Top issues faculty wanted to see on the

Senate Agenda …

Page 28: State of the Faculty Survey

Ranking What Faculty Thought the Senate Should Address

Impor-tance

1Administration’s responsiveness to issues that impact faculty.

4.03

2 Administration’s consistency and accountability. 3.98

3 Improving tenured/tenure track faculty working conditions. 3.67

4 Rank and Tenure process. 3.63

5 Governance issues at LMU. 3.53

6 Improvement in LMU information technology. 3.39

7 Climate issues at LMU. 3.22

8 Faculty Service report process. 3.14

9 LMU faculty committee structure and accountability. 3.09

10 Housing issues among faculty at LMU. 3.07

11Improving part-time/adjunct/clinical faculty working conditions.

2.97

12 Dining/food issues at LMU. 2.58

12 Child Care issues among faculty at LMU 2.58

38 written responses from faculty – to be coded

Page 29: State of the Faculty Survey

Conclusion1. Craft the senate agenda to represent faculty better: a. Administration’s responsiveness, consistency and accountability b. Improving faculty working condition

2. Feel the pulse of the faculty and address top areas of faculty anxiety:

a. governance b. R&T c. Core d. Climate

3. Communicate better with faculty about what we plan to do and what we have accomplished.