Faculty survey data 1989-2005: Trends and Comparisons with peers and student survey results

1

North Dakota State UniversityOffice of Institutional Research and AnalysisHERI Faculty Survey; Student NSSE, SSI, AOS

Faculty survey data 1989-2005: Trends and

Comparisons with peers and student survey results

William Slanger, Director

Institutional Research and Analysis

North Dakota State University

AIRUM2005

S:\OIRA\SHARED\oia_website\faculty\facultysurveydata

2


Points

1. Results make sense

2. Lowered anxiety over sample sizes and response rates

3. Compare yourself to self-selected peers

4. Multiple sources of info said same thing

5. Focus groups

3


HERI Faculty Survey

Year Number of Respondents

1989 214

1998 198

2002 190

2005 144

About 500 full-time faculty, i.e., 43 to 30% of total faculty

4


HERI Faculty Survey

Do your interests lie primarily in teaching or research?

1=heavy teaching, 2=leaning teaching, 3=leaning research, 4= heavy research

Year Average

1989 2.31

1998 2.37

2002 2.50

2005 2.35

5


HERI Faculty Survey

Peer Comparisons

1. Oregon State University2. University of Alaska – Fairbanks3. University of Arkansas – Fayetteville4. University of Idaho5. Utah State University

And

Public universities of medium selectivity

6


HERI Faculty SurveyHours per week doing?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Scheduled teaching hours in classroom 3.31 3.26 3.08 3.39 3.68 3.50 3.40

Preparing for teaching (including reading student papers and grading) 4.09 4.12 3.95 4.23 4.27 4.08 3.90

Advising and counseling of students 2.46 2.40 2.43 2.47 2.48 2.32 2.40

Committee work and meetings 2.32 2.46 2.46 2.41 2.39 2.33 2.38

Research and scholarly writing 4.19 3.98 4.26 3.72 3.35 3.16 3.68

Full-time undergraduate faculty

7


HERI Faculty SurveyHours per week doing?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Other creative products/performances - 1.88 1.81 1.68 1.64 1.74 1.66

Consultation with clients/patients 1.80 1.61 1.59 1.51 1.36 1.36 1.40

Community or public service - 2.06 2.00 1.89 1.86 1.92 1.78

Outside consulting/freelance work - 1.53 1.57 1.28 1.28 1.39 1.42

Household/childcare duties - 3.72 3.79 3.86 3.67 3.75 3.64


8


HERI Faculty SurveyImportance as undergrad goals?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Prepare students for employment after college 2.96 3.11 3.02 3.08 82% 78% 71%

Develop moral character 2.65 2.58 2.65 2.69 64 50 49

Provide for students’ emotional development 2.29 2.20 2.19 2.26 40 29 29

Help students develop personal values 2.63 2.55 2.44 2.46 57 43 43

Instill in students a commitment to community service - 2.24 2.24 2.35 43 37 33

Full-time undergraduate faculty,

% Very important & Essential

9



Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Prepare students for responsible citizenship - 2.59 2.66 2.59 55% 59% 55%

Enhance students knowledge of an appreciation for other racial ethnic groups

- 2.44 2.46 2.54 55 55 52

Instill a basic appreciation of the liberal arts - - - 2.33 45 47 48

Promote ability to write effectively - - - 3.36 91 87 86

Facilitate search for meaning/purpose in life - - - 2.11 29 29 29



10


HERI Faculty SurveyHow many have you published?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Articles in academic/professional journals 3.94 4.46 4.30 4.13 3.88 3.75 4.45

Chapters in edited volumes 1.65 2.07 2.14 2.11 2.04 2.00 2.44

Books, manuals, or monographs 1.77 1.84 1.61 1.53 1.59 1.65 1.87

Other, such as patents or computer software products - - - 1.42 1.38 1.38 1.38


11


HERI Faculty SurveyGeneral activities?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Were you born in the U.S.A.? - 1.88 1.82 1.82 83% 89% 85%

Are you a U.S. citizen? 1.94 1.93 1.88 1.89 89 95 93

Received funding for your work from foundations - - - 1.33 30 23 31

Received funding for your work from State or Federal Government

- - - 1.58 49 49 50

Received funding for your work from business or industry - - - 1.37 32 27 28


% Yes

12


HERI Faculty SurveyHow high a priority for NDSU?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

To develop a sense of community among students and faculty

2.18 2.24 2.28 2.54 55% 42% 43%

To develop leadership ability among students 2.31 2.40 2.36 2.61 55 43 44

To help students learn how to bring about change in American society

1.79 1.79 1.82 2.14 31 25 26

To increase or maintain institutional prestige 2.81 2.69 2.87 2.91 75 61 69

To mentor new faculty - - 2.28 2.55 50 40 41


% High and Highest

13


HERI Faculty SurveyExtent you agree with?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Faculty are interested in students’ personal problems 2.82 2.90 2.83 2.85 79% 72% 69%

Faculty feel that most students are well-prepared academically 2.08 2.16 2.35 2.33 36 27 35

Faculty here are strongly interested in the academic problems of undergraduates

2.95 3.18 3.08 2.99 84 71 69

Most students are strongly committed to community service - 2.11 2.23 2.22 35 29 27

My values are congruent with the dominate institutional values - - - 2.83 75 53 55


% Agree somewhat & Strongly

14


HERI Faculty SurveyHow well descriptive of NDSU?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

It is easy for students to see faculty outside of regular office hours

2.26 2.49 2.49 2.53 60% 51% 43%

Faculty here respect each other 2.28 2.22 2.23 2.49 50 45 46

Faculty are rewarded for being good teachers 1.64 1.65 1.71 1.82 12 7 10

There is respect for the expression of diverse values and beliefs

- - - 2.21 27 20 26

Faculty are rewarded for their efforts to use instructional technology

- - - 2.00 24 12 14


% Very descriptive

15


HERI Faculty SurveySource of stress last two years?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Managing household responsibilities 1.74 1.76 1.84 1.92 72% 73% 72%

Research or publishing demands 2.04 2.04 2.08 2.12 76 65 73

Teaching load 1.89 1.84 1.83 1.78 66 68 63

Lack of personal time 2.20 2.14 2.07 2.06 78 75 73

Job security - - - 1.5 33 34 26


% Somewhat & Extensive

16


HERI Faculty SurveySatisfied with these job aspects?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Quality of students 3.10 3.22 3.41 3.57 54% 45% 48%

Professional relationships with other faculty 3.91 3.80 3.97 4.02 80 75 75

Social relationships with other faculty - 3.43 3.60 3.62 72 64 62

Relationships with administration 3.33 3.59 3.49 3.69 68 47 52

Overall job satisfaction 3.61 3.64 3.69 3.87 76 70 75


% Satisfied or Very satisfied

17


HERI Faculty SurveyAgreement with following?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Colleges should be actively involved in solving social problems

- 2.61 2.68 2.84 75% 68% 70%

Tenure is an outmoded concept - 1.86 2.06 2.05 37 34 31

Tenure is essential to attract the best minds to academe - 2.97 2.88 2.84 68 64 68

Realistically, an individual can do little to bring about changes in society

- - - 1.74 12 19 19

Colleges should be concerned with facilitating undergraduate students’ spiritual development

- - - 1.90 26 18 16



18


HERI Faculty SurveyImportance to you personally?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Developing a meaningful philosophy of life 3.07 3.06 2.98 2.90 71% 66% 67%

Integrating spirituality into my life - 2.64 2.50 2.45 45 41 36

Being a good colleague - 3.29 3.29 3.40 93 91 91

Achieving congruence between my own values and institutional values

- - 2.48 2.54 61 44 45

Serving as a role model to students - - - 3.36 90 84 83



19


HERI Faculty SurveyTo what extent do you?


% Great extent

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg. SU Avg. 5 PUMS

Experience joy in your work - - - 2.60 65% 60% 64%

Feel good about the direction in which your life is headed - - - 2.54 57 57 61

Feel that your work adds meaning to your life - - - 2.63 69 61 67

Consider yourself a religious person - - - 2.13 41 30 27

Consider yourself a spiritual person - - - 2.36 53 44 39

Seek opportunities to grow spiritually - - - 1.99 31 28 24

20


HERI Faculty Survey

Conclusions:1. Character counts.

2. i.e., NDSU faculty are more interested in “niceness,” “character,” and “happiness,” and instilling these attributes in students than faculty at peers.

3. NDSU faculty are happy campers.

21


HERI Faculty Survey

Conclusion:

Students are saying it is nice to play nice with the faculty and we appreciate where we think you are coming from, but we are afraid we are not learning enough.

This is probably because faculty are overestimating both the amount of entry student academic ability and the amount of student learning upon exit from NDSU.

Faculty need to narrow this perception gap.

22



Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Prepare students for responsible citizenship

- 2.59 2.66 2.59 55% 59% 55%

Enhance students’ knowledge of and appreciation for other racial ethnic groups

- 2.44 2.46 2.54 55 55 52

Instill a basic appreciation of the liberal arts

- - - 2.33 45 47 48

Promote ability to write effectively

- - - 3.36 91% 87% 86%

Facilitate search for meaning/purpose in life

- - - 2.11 29 29 29



23


Alumni Outcomes Survey -1999-2001 combined

Only 36% said NDSU had a major impact on “Recognizing and using effective written communication skills,” compared to 45% for peers.

The respective moderate percentages were 47 and 37%, i.e., sums of major and moderate impact the same, but reversed in disfavor of NDSU.

24


Alumni Outcomes Survey -1999-2001 combined

“Writing should be a larger part of the upper-level courses at NDSU. I believe NDSU students need more writing skills education than they receive in the required English courses.”

“I could have used more writing classes, particularly technical writing.”

“However, I think more classes should stress writing skills and public speaking.”

25


HERI Faculty SurveyHow well descriptive of NDSU?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

It is easy for students to see faculty outside of regular office hours

2.26 2.49 2.49 2.53 60% 51% 43%

Faculty here respect each other 2.28 2.22 2.23 2.49 50 45 46

Faculty are rewarded for being good teachers 1.64 1.65 1.71 1.82 12 7 10

There is respect for the expression of diverse values and beliefs

- - - 2.21 27 20 26

Faculty are rewarded for their efforts to use instructional technology

- - - 2.00 24 12 14


% Very descriptive

26


HERI Faculty SurveySatisfied with these job aspects?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Quality of students 3.10 3.22 3.41 3.57 54% 45% 48%

Professional relationships with other faculty

3.91 3.80 3.97 4.02 80 75 75

Social relationships with other faculty

- 3.43 3.60 3.62 72 64 62

Relationships with administration

3.33 3.59 3.49 3.69 68 47 52

Overall job satisfaction 3.61 3.64 3.69 3.87 76 70 75


% Satisfied or Very satisfied

27


HERI Faculty SurveyExtent you agree with?

Item ‘89 ’98 ‘02 ‘05 Avg.

NDSU

Avg. 5 Peers

PUMS

Faculty are interested in students’ personal problems 2.82 2.90 2.83 2.85 79% 72% 69%

Faculty feel that most students are well-prepared academically 2.08 2.16 2.35 2.33 36 27 35

Faculty here are strongly interested in the academic problems of undergraduates

2.95 3.18 3.08 2.99 84 71 69

Most students are strongly committed to community service

- 2.11 2.23 2.22 35 29 27

My values are congruent with the dominate institutional values

- - - 2.83 75 53 55



28


National Survey of Student Engagement - 2000 & 2002

Level of Academic

Challenge

NDSU Deciles relative to Doctoral Intensives0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

First-yr

2000 x 2002 xSenior

2000 x 2002 x

29


National Survey of Student Engagement - 2005

Freshmen – Level of Academic Challenge

Mean Lower 95% CI Upper 95% CI

NDSU 48.1Doc-Int 51.3 -4.9 -1.6NSSE 2005 52.6

Freshmen – Active and Collaborative Learning

NDSU 41.3Doc-Int 41.2 -1.8 1.9NSSE 2005 42.4

30



Seniors – Level of Academic Challenge

Mean Lower 95% CI Upper 95% CI

NDSU 50.8Doc-Int 55.5 -6.3 -3.0NSSE 2005 56.5

Seniors – Active and Collaborative Learning

NDSU 46.4Doc-Int 51.3 -6.6 -3.2NSSE 2005 51.5

31



Doctoral Intensive Peers

1. Northern Arizona State2. South Dakota State University3. University of Montana4. University of South Dakota5. University of North Dakota6. Wichita State University

32



P values from logistic regression

Peers Doc-Intensive

Level of Academic Challenge:

NDSU less than: .0409 .0001

Active and collaborative learning:


Student interaction with faculty members:


33



Doctoral Extensive Peers (SBHE peers)

1. Oregon State University2. Kansas State University3. New Mexico State University4. University of Idaho5. University of Wyoming6. Utah State University7. University of Arkansas

34



P values from logistic regression

Peers Doc-Intensive

Level of Academic Challenge:


Active and collaborative learning:

NDSU greater than/less than: .4300 .0078

Student interaction with faculty members:


35

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

NDSU 99 NDSU 02 NDSU 04 X 02 X 04

4.8

4.9

5

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

7. Very satisfied

6. Satisfied

5. Somewhat satisfied

4. Neutral

3. Somewhat

dissatisfied

2. Not very satisfied

1. Not satisfied at all

Means(scale of 1 thru 7)

Instructional Effectiveness Instructional Effectiveness - Undergrad- Undergrad

Student Satisfaction Inventory North Dakota State University - Campus

36

Student Satisfaction Inventory North Dakota State University - Campus

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

4.9

5

7. Very satisfied

6. Satisfied


4. Neutral

3. Somewhat dissatisfied




Instructional Effectiveness Instructional Effectiveness - Undergrad- Undergrad#3 Faculty care about me as an individual

37

Student Satisfaction InventoryNorth Dakota State University - Campus

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%


4.7

4.8

4.9

5

5.1

5.2

5.3

7. Very satisfied

6. Satisfied


4. Neutral

3. Somewhat dissatisfied




Instructional Effectiveness Instructional Effectiveness - Undergrad- Undergrad#25 Faculty are fair and unbiased in their treatment of individual students

38


Other sources of collaborative information

ACT Withdrawing/Non-returning Student Survey – 2 years

Disappointed with quality of instruction – major/minor reason

Third among sophomores at 15%

Fourth among juniors at 10%

Third overall at 8%

39



Internal survey of withdrawing students

“Instructor/classes” has slowly risen to the top of things not liked about NDSU from 13% fall 2002 to 23% spring 2005.

40



Five focus groups each of undergraduates and graduate students at 10 students each spring

2005

“Nice, friendly, competent university; but level of instruction is not something we can complement you on, particularly for us undergraduates, who have seen a 50% increase in tuition alone the last five years along with fee increases as well.”

41

HERI Faculty Survey; Student NSSE, SSI, AOS

HERI Faculty Survey

Conclusions:

Students are saying it is nice to play nice with the faculty and we appreciate where we think you are coming from, but we are afraid we are not learning enough.

This is probably because faculty are overestimating both the amount of entry student academic ability and the amount of student learning upon exit from NDSU.

Faculty need to narrow this perception gap.

42


Speculation

Faculty are projecting their positive views of and aspirations for the world onto the students and thus internalizing perceptions of student preparation and learning that are higher than reality.

The energies from the generally positive attitudes of the faculty and the students need to be continually encouraged to be directed toward increased student learning.

Documents

Faculty survey data 1989-2005: Trends and Comparisons with peers and student survey results