Faculty Well-Being Survey: Reappointment, Promotion, & Tenure Review

1. 2006 Faculty Well-Being Survey: Reappointment, Promotion & Tenure&Post-Tenure Review Presentation for NC State Faculty Senate February 27, 2007 Nancy Whelchel, PhD Assistant Director for Survey Research University Planning and Analysis http://www2.acs.ncsu.edu/UPA/survey/faculty/

2. Survey Population & Response Rate • On campus tenure/non-tenure track faculty/lecturers (including dept heads, music, PE, FYC) • FTE .75 AY04-05 & AY05-06 • Final population = 1,625 (No sampling) • 69.7% response rate • No significant differences in response rates among subgroups

3. Statement of Mutual Expectations • 10% faculty indicate no SME (not incl lecturers) • By Rank • 12% Full Profs • 7% Assoc Profs • 9% Assist Profs • 56% Lecturers • By Number of Years at NC State (not incl lecturers) • 12% >25 yrs • 14% 16-25 yrs • 10% 7-15 yrs • 8% < 7yrs • By College(not incl lectures) • 18% CHASS • 13% CED, COE, PAMS

4. Statement of Mutual Expectations Among those w/ SMEs: • SMEs are consistent w/ • Department vision (90% agree) • Department standards for promotion (92% agree) (But junior faculty are less likely to think so…) • Annual Performance Review feedback IS based on SME (81% agree)

5. Performance Reviews • Indication of no performance review • By Rank • 6% Full Profs • 7% Assoc Profs • 8% Assist Profs • 6% Lecturers • By Number of Years at NC State • 9% < 7yrs • 5% 7-15 yrs • 7% 16-25 yrs • 6% >25 yrs

6. Performance Review & RPT • Faculty give positive ratings to: • Clarity of performance review standards and procedures(77% and 85%) • Clarity of RPT standards and procedures(80% and 83%) • Clarity of Academic Tenure Policy(69%) • Equity of RPT standards and procedures(77% and 85%)

7. Performance Review & RPT • Procedures receive higher ratings than standards • Clarity receives higher ratings than equity • Very strong relationship between clarity of standards/procedures and perceptions of equity High understanding = high perception of equity

8. Performance Review & RPT • Consistently lower ratings given by: • Those without an SME or performance review • Those who’ve not participated in RPT process • Assistant professors • Women Assoc Profs • Women (excluding lecturers) • Clarity of performance review standards • Understanding of RPT procedures • Equity of applying RPT standards • (no differences by race/ethnicity)

9. Performance Review Feedback • Overall faculty give positive ratings to feedback from their performance review • Highest ratings to being appropriately based on SME(81% agree) • Lowest rating to helping to understand performance relative to peers(55.5% agree) • Relatively lower ratings given by • Assoc Profs • Female Assoc Profs • Male Full Profs

10. Support & Rewards for 6 Realms of Faculty Responsibility • Overall faculty consistently more satisfied with rewards for each realm than with support/resources for the realm Gap is especially large for “Discovery of Knowledge” 9% ‘strongly agree’ sufficient resources are provided VS 33% ‘strongly agree’excellent performance is rewarded

11. Support & Rewards for 6 Realms of Faculty Responsibility • Consistent differences in ratings by rank • Assist Profs consistently more positive than others about resources • Full Profs consistently least positive about resources and most positive about rewards • Gender or racial/ethnic differences are rare

12. National comparisons on Tenure: COACHE Survey(Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education) • NC State rated in the top four among the 31 participating doctoral universities in the area of “tenure”

13. COACHE Survey: Peer comparisons on tenure(Peers: Iowa State, Michigan State, Ohio State, Univ. Arizona, Univ. Minnesota) • NC State faculty gave significantly higher ratings than faculty at peer institutions to • Clarity of tenure process, criteria, and standards in department • Body of evidence considered in decision • Own tenure prospects • Clarity of expectations as scholar, teacher, advisor • Reasonableness of expectations as scholar, teacher, advisor, department colleague, service • NC State faculty had NO significantly lower ratings than peers on any tenure question

14. COACHE Survey: Peer comparisons on tenure by race and gender • Significantly higher ratings than peers on most tenure items • NC State female faculty • NC State faculty of color

15. HERI Faculty Survey(Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA) • HERI • 69% ‘strongly/somewhat agree’(4-yr public univ) “Criteria for advancement and promotion decisions are clear” • NC State • 80% ‘very/fairly well’ “How well do you understand your departments’ standards for RPT?” • 83% ‘very/fairly well’ “How well do you understand your departments’ procedures for RPT?”

16. The stress of RPT… • Top 5 sources of “a great deal” or “some” stress: • Workload (73%) • Work/life balance (71%) • Research/publications demands (72%) • RPT (56%) • Committee work (50%) • RPT stress varies by • Rank • Gender • Rank * Gender

17. Stress from RPT by rank * gender

18. Relationship between attitudes about RPT and stress More positive evaluation of: • Clarity of performance evaluation standards & procedures • Clarity of RPT standards & procedures • Fairness of RPT standards & procedures • Resources & rewards for ‘discovery of knowledge’ Lower frequency of reported RPT stress (Especially for Assoc. Profs) (w/ no variation by race or gender)

19. Giving/receiving help in understanding RPT process • Frequency varies by rank • Assistant professors (25% ‘seldom’/’never’) • Assoc professors (16%) • Full professors (12%) • (No gender or race/ethnicity differences when control for lecturers)

20. Relationship between attitudes about RPT and giving/receiving help understanding RPT Assistant Profs’ positive evaluation of: • Clarity of performance evaluation standards & procedures • Clarity of RPT standards & procedures • Fairness of RPT standards & procedures • Resources & rewards for ‘discovery of knowledge’ Higher frequency of giving/receiving help understanding RPT process

21. Post-Tenure Review: Experience and Awareness • Most tenured faculty now have experience with PTR • 72% Full Profs & 53% Assoc Profs had review • 68% Full Profs & 23% Assoc Profs served on review committee • Reporting “insufficient experience” to express an opinion on PTR questions: • 19% - 24% Assoc Profs • 60% - 70% Assist Profs

22. Post-Tenure Review: Satisfaction • 70% of those with any PTR experience are either “satisfied” (57%) or “very satisfied” (13%) with the post-tenure review process • Satisfaction w/ clarity and fairness of standards and procedures varies by gender and rank • Men more satisfied than women • Full professors more satisfied than associate profs

23. Using the results: Some suggestions • Celebrate – it’s going relatively well! (but remember there are areas to improve on…) • Clarify/strengthen SMEs & Annual Performance Reviews • Nuture junior faculty (clarity of standards/procedures is essential) • Get a better understanding of issues facing female Assoc Profs - - they are not happy with RPT! • Attempt to provide more resources for discovery of knowledge.