1. Getting the Most from COACHE Study of Early Career Faculty January 30, 2007 Cathy A. Trower, Ph.D.

2. COACHE Survey Tenure-Track Faculty Job Satisfaction© Demographic [16*] Tenure clarity and reasonableness of expectations [20] Work load, work environment [20] Policies and practices importance and effectiveness [32] Climate, culture, collegiality [16] Global satisfaction [7] Best and worst aspects [2] *signifies number of questions on survey

3. 2005-06 COACHE Institutions 24 NASULGCs and 8 Private RUs Arizona State University Auburn University Clemson University East Carolina State University Indiana University Iowa State University Kansas State University Michigan State University North Carolina A&T State University North Carolina State University Ohio State University Texas Tech University University at Albany, SUNY University at Buffalo, SUNY University of Arizona University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign University of Kansas University of Memphis University of Minnesota, Twin Cities University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill University of North Carolina at Charlotte University of North Carolina at Greensboro University of North Carolina at Wilmington University of Virginia Brown University Case Western Reserve University Dartmouth College Harvard University Northeastern University Stanford University Syracuse University Tufts University

4. 2005-06 COACHE Institutions Public AAUs Indiana University Iowa State University Michigan State University Ohio State University University at Buffalo, SUNY University of Arizona University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign University of Kansas University of Minnesota, Twin Cities University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill University of Virginia

5. COACHE regression analysis tells us that, overall… Climate is most highly correlated with global satisfaction. [t = 28.059] The Nature of Work variables factor in next. [t = 16.160] Tenure variables are third. [t = 9.036] Work-Family comes in fourth. [t = 7.425] Policy effectiveness is fifth. [t = 5.306] Compensation is last. [t = 5.039]

6. COACHE regression coefficients OverallMalesFemales Collegiality28.059 [1]18.708 [1]16.412 [1] Nature of work16.160 [2]12.210 [2]9.052 [2] Tenure9.036 [3]4.932 [3]3.272 [6] Work-Family7.425 [4]3.098 [6]4.013 [4] Policy effectiveness5.306 [5]3.182 [5]4.543 [3] Compensation5.039 [6]3.476 [4]3.279 [5]

7. COACHE regression coefficients MSUSig level Collegiality6.974 [1].000 Nature of work3.106 [2].002 Compensation1.699 [3].092 Policy effectiveness1.269 [4].207 Tenure-.196 [5].845 Work-Family-.175 [6].861

8. Your Selected Peers

9. Response Rates Michigan State University [180 of 319]56% Arizona State University53% Indiana University56% Ohio State University48% University of Illinois/Urbana Champaign45% University of Minnesota58%

10. Response Rates at MSU: Gender Pop%Resp%RR Women13041%7642%58% Men18959%10458%55% Total319--180--56%

11. Response Rates at MSU: Race Pop%Resp%RR NativeAm41%32%75% Asian/PI5818%2212%38% Black227%116%50% Hispanic165%84%50% White21969%13676%63%

12. What’s Best About Working at MSU? OverallWomenMenWhite Faculty Faculty of Color Quality of Colleagues Sense of Fit Worst Teaching Load Cost of Living Colleague Support

13. What’s Worst About Working at MSU? Geographic location Lack of others like me Compensation Quality of grad students Men Geographic location Unrelenting pressure Lack support for research Tenure criteria not clear Geographic location Unrelenting pressure Quality of grad students Tenure criteria not clear Geographic location Lack of others like me Lack of “fit” Lack of diversity Women White faculty Faculty of Color

14. MSU Global Satisfaction 80% of all faculty would accept position again – Less so for faculty of color; 32 nd percentile On a “great” = 5; “awful” = 1 scale – Overall score 3.83 – 73 rd percentile among all COACHE universities Institution as a workplace – 3 rd among peers overall; 76 th percentile Department as a workplace – 5 th among peers overall; 38 th percentile – Faculty of color compared to peers 22 nd percentile

15. Assuming tenure, how long stay? (MSU Data)

16. Why Five Years or Less? (MSU data) Better geographic location [7] Better fit [5] Great support for research More collaboration Lack of recognition Not getting stuck Lack of support Worsening culture/environment

17. Your Faculty Demographically MSUAll Univ’s Peers Did not leave prior position voluntarily 15%4%2% Began their service with credit for prior experience 45%36%32% Faculty of color31%26%28% $90,000+ salary range20%16%13%

18. MSU High and Low Scores HighLow Tenure4.112.59 Nature of work4.663.00 Policies & practices effectiveness3.752.51 Climate, culture, collegiality3.852.89 Global satisfaction4.113.30

19. MSU Scores N > 4.00% > 4.00 Tenure1/195% Nature of work5/1828% Policies & practices importance12/1675% Policies & practices effectiveness0/160 Climate, culture, collegiality0/120

20. Tenure MSUAgg U Tenure standards3.203.21 Tenure criteria3.653.54 Tenure process3.643.63 Body of evidence for tenure3.543.45 One’s own prospects3.823.71

21. Tenure Clarity of expectations for…MSUAgg U Scholarship3.973.81 Teaching3.743.77 Campus citizenship3.36 > Public AAUs 3.34 Colleagueship3.353.32 Advising3.303.27 Community membership3.23 > Public AAUs 3.02

22. Tenure Reasonableness of expectations for…MSUAgg U Scholarship3.913.87 Teaching4.114.10 Campus citizenship3.873.77 Colleagueship3.883.89 Advising3.87 Community membership3.803.68

23. Mixed messages – 57% agree MSU faculty less likely to report receiving mixed messages than faculty at other Public AAUs

24. Tenure based on performance MSU faculty expressed less agreement (3.45) than faculty at: – Other public AAUs3.62 – Peers3.58 MSU faculty expressed greater agreement (3.45) than faculty at: – All universities3.38

25. MSU Nature of Work: Teaching Rank Among Peers and All Universities Percentile Among Peers All Univ’s Number of courses (sig > other public AAUs) 2 nd 92 nd Quality of graduate students4 th 70 th Quality of undergraduate students3 rd 62 nd Influence over which courses2 nd 54 th Discretion over course content3 rd 54 th Level of courses4 th 38 th Number of students (sig < other public AAUs) 5 th 27 th

26. MSU Nature of Work: Research Rank Among Peers and All Universities Percentile Among Peers All Univ’s Amount of time for research4 th 78 th Amount of outside funding expected5 th 70 th Influence over research focus5 th 51 st What’s expected as a researcher (sig < other public AAUs) 5 th 49 th

27. MSU Nature of Work: Services & Other Rank Among Peers and All Universities Percentile Among Peers All Univ’s Quality of computing support services2 nd 89 th Quality of facilities (sig > other public AAUs) 1 st 89 th Quality of research support services3 rd 81 st How expected to spend time2 nd 70 th Access to TFs and GAs5 th 59 th Quality of clerical support services3 rd 49 th Quality of teaching support services5 th 46 th

28. Policy Importance & Effectiveness (MSU data) Overall, the three most important policies were also the most effective. Note: The importance question asked, “Regardless of whether the following policies and practices currently apply to your institution, please rate how important each would be to your success?” PolicyImportanceEffectiveness Upper limit on teaching4.573.66 Travel funds4.513.75 Informal mentoring4.493.65

29. Policy Importance & Effectiveness MSU respondents saw grant assistance, formal mentoring, and to a lesser extent, upper limit on committee assignments as important but ineffective. PolicyImpEff Grant assistance4.252.62 Formal mentoring4.062.74 Upper limit on committee assignments4.403.23

30. MSU Gender and Race Differences 15 of 16 policies are more important to females than to males. 13 of 16 policies are more important to faculty of color than to white faculty.

31. MSU Compensation and Family Matters Rank Among Peers and All Universities Percentile Among Peers All Univ’s Compensation (sig > other public AAUs) 3 rd 86 th Institution & having children3 rd 78 th Institution & raising children3 rd 76 th Balance work & home4 th 41 st Departmental colleagues & having children5 th 30 th Departmental colleagues & raising children6 th 22 nd

32. MSU Climate, Culture, Collegiality Rank Among Peers and All Universities Percentile Unity among faculty in my School2 nd 59 th Intellectual vitality of senior colleagues5 th 51 st Opportunities to collaborate w/ senior colleagues5 th 38 th Interest senior faculty take in your professional develop5 th 35 th Amount of professional interaction w/ senior colleagues5 th 30 th Amount of personal interaction w/ junior colleagues6 th 22 nd Unity among faculty in my department6 th 22 nd Amount of personal interaction w/ senior colleagues6 th 22 nd Amount of professional interaction w/ junior colleagues5 th 22 nd Dept treats junior faculty fairly compared to one another5 th 19 th How well one “fits” in their department6 th 16 th Fairness w/ which immediate supervisor evaluates work6 th 11 th < < < < < < <