Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byFrank Dawson Modified over 9 years ago
1
1 NC State Faculty 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 nancy_whelchel@ncsu.edu http://www2.acs.ncsu.edu/UPA/survey/faculty/FWBS06.CNR.Sept26_08.ppt
2
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
3
3 Research Design, Methods, & Response Rates
4
4 Survey Objectives Provide readily accessible, “centralized” information Collect relevant & actionable data
5
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
6
6 Questionnaire Included 13 areas related to ‘well-being’ @350 closed-end 8 open-end
7
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
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
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
10
10 Reports Available & How to Interpret Them…
11
11 Results & Reports Available 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
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
13 Interpreting Results for 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
14
14 Leadership
15
15 Department Leadership Kudos Positive ratings for: Allowing faculty autonomy (91%) Support for academic freedom (90%)
16
16 Department Leadership Concerns 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
17 College Leadership Kudos Positive ratings for: Supporting academic freedom (96%) Allowing department autonomy (88%) Promoting diversity within the college (88%) Advocating for the college (85%)
18
18 College Leadership Concerns (& 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
19 Faculty Input Kudos 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
20 Faculty Input Concerns (& 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
21 Professional Development Kudos Positive ratings for: Opportunities to participate in teaching workshops, etc. (95% [33% ‘very satisfied’])
22
22 Professional Development Concerns (& 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%)
23
23 Feedback, Rewards, & Compensation
24
24 Performance Review Kudos 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
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
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)
27
27 Workload & Support
28
28 Work-related Demands Concerns 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
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
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
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
32 Teaching Kudos (& 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
33 Students Concerns 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
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
35 Contracts & Grants Concerns (& 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
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%)
37
37 Department Life…
38
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
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
40 Collegiality Kudos 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
41 Collegiality Kudos (& 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
42 Collaboration Kudos 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
43 Diversity/Multiculturalism Kudos Positive ratings for department’s efforts to recruit, support, and retain students and faculty from underrepresented groups
44
44 Diversity/Multiculturalism Kudos (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
45 Vision Kudos 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%)
46
46 Interests & Activities…
47
47 Globalism / Service Kudos 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
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
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’)
50
50 CNR Faculty Well-Being Questions? Comments? Discussion?
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.