|
|
 |
|
|
|
December 5, 2007
Top Academic Workplaces
COACHE recognizes campuses with highest faculty job satisfaction
>| Download this report: Top Academic Workplaces (2005-07) [PDF, 141K]
While the majority of junior faculty at America's colleges and universities are satisfied at work, some institutions are doing particularly well in this regard. The Tenure-Track Faculty Job Satisfaction Survey, administered by the Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education (COACHE) in 2005 and 2006, determined that some colleges and universities are "exemplary" on certain key dimensions of faculty work/life. The COACHE Survey considered the following categories in its assessment: tenure practices, clarity, and reasonableness; effectiveness of key policies (e.g., mentoring, childcare, and leaves); nature of work: teaching, research and support services; work and family balance; satisfaction with compensation; climate, culture, and collegiality; and global satisfaction.
"We are again recognizing those colleges and universities that are succeeding in their efforts to improve the quality of work/life for their junior faculty," said Dr. Cathy Trower, COACHE Director. "By earning and maintaining the distinction of being a great place for new scholars to work, these exemplary institutions will be most able to attract and retain top academic talent in an increasingly competitive faculty labor market."
In order to qualify as an "exemplar," a college or university needed scores that were notably higher than similar institutions. Two universities (Brown and Stanford) achieved exemplary status in eight out of 12 categories, while one university (Duke) was outstanding in seven categories, and another (Dartmouth) in six categories. Three colleges (Bowdoin, Davidson and Kenyon) achieved exemplary status in five categories, while three colleges (Carleton, Goucher and Trinity) and two universities (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and University of Notre Dame) were named exemplars in four categories. A total of 38 institutions were named an exemplar in at least one category.
Beyond the institutions named exemplary, the COACHE Survey gave insight into the satisfaction of junior faculty with America's colleges and universities. The average score for overall satisfaction with one's institution, comprised of responses from nearly 7,000 faculty members from 78 institutions, was 3.65 out of 5.00. The survey results also indicated some thought-provoking similarities and differences in satisfaction based on gender, race, and type of institution. For instance, on average across all participating institutions, women were only slightly less satisfied than men (3.63 v. 3.66) with their institutions as places to work, faculty of color were about as satisfied as white faculty (3.64 v. 3.65), university faculty were significantly less satisfied than college faculty (3.60 v. 4.06), and faculty at public universities were significantly less satisfied than their counterparts at private institutions (3.60 v. 3.79). A complete summary report of the COACHE findings can be downloaded from www.coache.org.
# # #
About COACHE
Based at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and supported by member institutions, COACHE is committed to gathering the peer diagnostic data academic administrators need to recruit, retain, and develop the cohort most critical to the long-term future of their institutions. For more information on the Collaborative, please visit www.coache.org.
Exemplary Institutions, by Theme
This table lists alphabetically the two liberal arts colleges, among 22, and the four universities, among 56, with the highest mean ratings for each of the dimensions of faculty work/life we measure. Institutions with ratings within .05 of the second college (or fourth university) are also included in the lists.
| Theme |
Liberal Arts Colleges |
Universities |
Tenure Practices Overall
19-23; 24a-f; 25a-f; 26; 27a |
Davidson College
Kenyon College
Trinity College
|
Auburn University
Brown University
California State University, Fullerton
Fayetteville State University
North Carolina State University
Ohio State University
University of Kansas
University of North Carolina, Pembroke
|
Tenure Clarity
19-23; 26 |
Davidson College
Kenyon College
Trinity College
|
Brown University
Cal Poly Pomona
California State University, Fullerton
California State University, San Marcos
Fayetteville State University
North Dakota State University
University of Connecticut
|
Tenure Reasonableness
25a-f |
Goucher College
Wabash College |
Auburn University
Brown University
Fayetteville State University
North Carolina State University
Ohio State University
University of Kansas
University of North Carolina, Wilmington
University of North Carolina, Pembroke
University of Virginia
|
Policy Effectiveness Overall
34b 1-16 |
Denison University
Goucher College
Hamilton College
Kenyon College
|
Auburn University
Duke University
North Dakota State University
Ohio State University
Stanford University
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University of Kansas
University of Minnesota
University of Notre Dame
|
Nature of Work: Overall
28; 29a-f; 30b-d; 31; 32; 33a-d |
Amherst College
Bowdoin College
Carleton College
College of Holy Cross
Davidson College
Goucher College |
Brown University
Dartmouth College
Duke University
Stanford University
University of Notre Dame
|
Nature of Work: Teaching
29a-g; 33c |
Bowdoin College
Carleton College
College of Holy Cross
Davidson College
|
Brown University
Dartmouth College
Duke University
Harvard University
Stanford University
|
Nature of Work: Research
30b-d; 33b |
Bowdoin College
Denison University
|
Brown University
Dartmouth College
Duke University
Stanford University
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University of Notre Dame
|
Nature of Work: Support Services
33a-d |
Bowdoin College
Davidson College
|
Brown University
Dartmouth College
Indiana University, Bloomington
Stanford University
University of Notre Dame
|
Work and Family
34b 13-16; 35a-d; 37 |
Barnard College
Carleton College
Hamilton College
|
Duke University
Stanford University
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University of North Carolina, Pembroke
|
Compensation (Satisfaction)
36 |
Bowdoin College
Carleton College
Macalester College
| Dartmouth College
Duke University
Stanford University
University of Connecticut
|
Climate/Collegiality
34b 1-2; 38a-c; 39a-d; 40; 41; 43 |
Goucher College
Kenyon College
Trinity College
Wabash College
|
Appalachian State University
California State University, Fullerton
California State University, San Marcos
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
Western Carolina University
|
Global Satisfaction
45a-b; 46b; 48; 50 |
Kenyon College
Trinity College
|
Appalachian State University
Brown University
California State University, San Marcos
Dartmouth College
Duke University
Stanford University
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign
University of Minnesota
University of Virginia
|
Note
Only institutions that consented to be identified are included. Where an institution demurred, no additional institution was included to take its place on this list.
Composition of theme scores
All themes on this list are composed of survey responses along a 5-point scale, as follows:
Tenure Practices Overall
The tenure practices overall score was calculated by averaging: 1) the average of questions 19 through 23 (clarity of the tenure process, criteria, standards, body of evidence, and one's prospects for earning tenure); 2) the average of questions 24a through 24f (clarity of tenure expectations for scholarship, teaching, advising, colleagueship, campus citizenship, and community membership); 3) the average of questions 25a through 25f (the reasonableness of those expectations); question 26 (receipt of consistent messages from senior colleagues regarding tenure requirements); and 4) question 27a (how tenure decisions are made).
Tenure Clarity
The tenure clarity score was calculated by averaging: 1) the average of questions 19 through 23 (clarity of the tenure process, criteria, standards, body of evidence, and one's prospects for earning tenure); and 2) question 26 (receipt of consistent messages from senior colleagues regarding tenure requirements).
Tenure Reasonableness
The tenure reasonableness was calculated by averaging questions 25a through 25f (reasonableness of the tenure expectations for scholarship, teaching, advising, colleagueship, campus citizenship, and community membership).
Policy Effectiveness Overall
The policy effectiveness score is an overall average of the effectiveness ratings for 16 common faculty affairs policies (questions 34b1 through 34b16).
Nature of Work: Overall
The nature of work overall score was calculated by averaging: 1) question 28 (satisfaction with the way faculty spend their time); 2) the average of questions 29a through 29f (satisfaction with various aspects of teaching and quality of students); 3) the average of questions 30b through 30d (satisfaction with various aspects of research); 4) question 31 (quality of facilities); 5) question 32 (amount of access to Teaching Fellows; Graduate Assistants, et al.); and 6) the average of questions 33a through 33d (satisfaction with various support services).
Nature of Work: Teaching
The nature of work teaching score was calculated by averaging: 1) questions 29a through 29g (satisfaction with various aspects of teaching and quality of students), and 2) question 33c (quality of teaching support services).
Nature of Work: Research
The nature of work research score was calculated by averaging: 1) questions 30b through 30d (satisfaction with various aspects of research); and 2) question 33b (quality of research support services).
Nature of Work: Support Services
The nature of work support services score was calculated by averaging questions 33a through 33d (quality of various support services).
Work and Family
The work and family score was calculated by averaging: 1) questions 35a through 35d (agreement with various statements about whether colleagues and the institution do/does all they/it can to make having and raising children compatible with the tenure-track); 2) question 37 (satisfaction with being able to balance work and home); and 3) the average of questions 34b13 though 34b16 (effectiveness of childcare, financial assistance with housing, stop-the-clock and spousal hiring policies).
Compensation (Satisfaction)
The compensation variable consists of a single question (36) on satisfaction with compensation (salary and benefits).
Climate/Collegiality
The climate/collegiality score was calculated by averaging: 1) questions 38a through 38c (satisfaction about fairness of evaluation of work, interest senior faculty take in professional development, and opportunities to collaborate with senior faculty); 2) questions 39a through 39d (satisfaction with amount of personal and professional interaction with senior and junior colleagues); 3) question 40 (how well you "fit"); 4) question 41 (intellectual vitality of senior colleagues); 5) question 43 (how well department treats junior faculty); and questions 34b1 and 34b2 (effectiveness of formal and informal mentoring programs).
Global satisfaction
The global satisfaction score was calculated by averaging: 1) questions 45a and 45b (best and worst aspects about working at the institution); 2) question 46b (how much the institution's chief academic officer cares about quality of life for junior faculty); 3) question 48 (would the faculty member accept this position if they had it to do over); and 4) question 50 (a rating of the institution as a place to work on a "great" to "awful" scale).
Questions and comments
Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
8 Story Street, 5th Floor
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138
(617) 496-9348
coache@gse.harvard.edu
>| Download this report: Top Academic Workplaces (2005-07) [PDF, 141K]
|
|
|
|
|
