In 2016, COACHE partnered with the University of California System to pilot our newest undertaking -- the Faculty Retenion and Exit Survey. This survey is the only multi-institutional study of faculty retention and exit, and examines the costs, conduct, and causes of faculty turnover.
In this webinar, Kiernan Mathews and Todd Benson describe how the survey came to be, and outline some of the initial findings from the pilot study along with some practical recommendations for Academic Affairs administrators.
These charts present data from the 2013 Faculty Job Satisfaction Survey, focusing on results across seven public universities. The charts represent the arithmetic mean, by academic area and by rank and tenure status, of select COACHE survey results. "NTT” faculty are full- time, non-tenure-track faculty. All items were rated by respondents on a five-point scale of satisfaction, agreement, etc. Thus, for example, faculty were asked not to report the number of courses they teach, but to rate their satisfaction with the number of courses they teach.
This book brings together leading practitioners and scholars engaged in professional development programming for and research on mid-career faculty members, those tasked with being the next generation of faculty leaders and mentors on their respective campuses, with little to no supports to do so effectively.
The stories, data, and resources shared in this book will provide inspiration—and reality checks—to administrators, faculty developers, and department chairs charged with supporting their faculties as they engage in academic work. Topics include faculty development for formal and informal leadership roles; strategies to support professional growth; teaching and learning as a form of scholarship; and strategies to recruit, retain, and promote underrepresented faculty populations.
While the authors acknowledge that mid-career faculty members face numerous challenges, this collection offers a counter narrative by looking at ways that faculty and/or institutions can assert themselves to find opportunities within challenging contexts.
To overcome the pressures pulling the academy apart, presidents and provosts, governing boards and legislatures, foundations and associations should commit to the cultivation of leadership from faculty members and by them. As the faculty profession and population become increasingly complex, leaders will need skills in relating, sensemaking, visioning, and inventing. A skills inventory conducted among provosts, deans, and senior faculty development administrators revealed that while most had strengths in the first two categories, their visioning and inventing skills were less developed. Institutions can cultivate these skills in faculty and invite faculty into the leadership process—and they must do so in order to effectively develop the faculties of the future.
College and university administrators frequently survey their faculty to inform decisions affecting the academic workplace. Higher education researchers, too, rely heavily on survey methodologies in their scholarly work. Survey response rates, however, have been declining steadily for decades, and when nonrespondents and respondents systematically differ on variables relevant to the instrument, the resulting nonresponse bias may lead those interpreting the data to erroneous conclusions. Despite the potentially corrosive impact of nonrandom missing data, relatively few scholarly studies—and fewer organizational reports—consider or control it.
Guided by the framework of organizational citizenship behavior (OCB), this research proposed to determine if faculty who respond to institutional surveys differ meaningfully from those who do not. Interpretation and implications of these findings are discussed for administrators and researchers, with particular consideration given to the faculty context of shared governance.