Survey Results—Survey Results—Faculty, Students, Faculty, Students,

AlumniAlumniWomen’s CommissionWomen’s Commission

March 30, 2007March 30, 2007

COACHE COACHE Collaborative on Academic Careers in Collaborative on Academic Careers in

Higher EducationHigher Education Coordinated by Harvard’s Graduate Coordinated by Harvard’s Graduate

School of Education (Cathy Trower and School of Education (Cathy Trower and Richard Chait)Richard Chait)

PurposePurpose To further enlighten academic leaders about To further enlighten academic leaders about

the experiences and concerns of junior facultythe experiences and concerns of junior faculty To provide data that lead to informed To provide data that lead to informed

discussions and appropriate actions to discussions and appropriate actions to improve the quality of work life for junior improve the quality of work life for junior facultyfaculty

Four Areas AssessedFour Areas Assessed

Tenure, nature of the workTenure, nature of the work Policies and practices at the Policies and practices at the

universityuniversity Climate, culture, and collegialityClimate, culture, and collegiality Global satisfaction Global satisfaction

Tenure ProcessTenure Process

Clemson has reasonable expectations Clemson has reasonable expectations for performance (4.07)for performance (4.07)

Clemson lacks clarity of the tenure Clemson lacks clarity of the tenure process (3.06 more than one standard process (3.06 more than one standard deviation below the mean of peers)deviation below the mean of peers)

Satisfaction with fairness of Satisfaction with fairness of immediate supervisor’s evaluation immediate supervisor’s evaluation (4.15) is higher than peers for females (4.15) is higher than peers for females and faculty of colorand faculty of color

From the COACHE, 2005 Executive Summary provided to Clemson University.

Nature of the WorkNature of the Work

Faculty are satisfied with theirFaculty are satisfied with their Discretion over their content in their Discretion over their content in their

courses (4.68)courses (4.68) The course levels (4.28)The course levels (4.28) The courses taught (4.24)The courses taught (4.24) The focus of their research (4.32)The focus of their research (4.32) The number of students taught (4.01)The number of students taught (4.01)

Policies and PracticesPolicies and Practices

Clemson ranks above its peers in the Clemson ranks above its peers in the effectiveness of travel funds for effectiveness of travel funds for female faculty membersfemale faculty members

Clemson’s effectiveness in Clemson’s effectiveness in professional assistance for professional assistance for improving teaching (3.55) ranks improving teaching (3.55) ranks above the peer group overall and by above the peer group overall and by race and genderrace and gender

Climate, culture and Climate, culture and collegialitycollegiality

Faculty of color report higher Faculty of color report higher satisfaction with how well they fit in their satisfaction with how well they fit in their department when compared to peersdepartment when compared to peers

Females report higher satisfaction with Females report higher satisfaction with the amount of professional interaction the amount of professional interaction with junior colleagues than peer with junior colleagues than peer institutionsinstitutions

Faculty of color rate a higher satisfaction Faculty of color rate a higher satisfaction with their departments as places to with their departments as places to work, while females rate this area below work, while females rate this area below our peersour peers

Global SatisfactionGlobal Satisfaction

The lowest mean score was in the The lowest mean score was in the effectiveness of childcare at 1.94effectiveness of childcare at 1.94

Satisfaction with the chief academic Satisfaction with the chief academic officer in caring about the quality of officer in caring about the quality of life for junior faculty (3.34) is higher life for junior faculty (3.34) is higher than our peer institutions overall, for than our peer institutions overall, for males, and for faculty of colormales, and for faculty of color

““Effectiveness Gaps”Effectiveness Gaps”

Professional assistance in obtaining Professional assistance in obtaining externally funded grants (50%)externally funded grants (50%)

Formal mentoring programs for junior Formal mentoring programs for junior faculty (48%)faculty (48%)

Childcare (46%)Childcare (46%) Spousal/partner hiring program (40%)Spousal/partner hiring program (40%) Paid or unpaid research (sabbatical) Paid or unpaid research (sabbatical)

leave during the probationary period leave during the probationary period (39%)(39%)

Best Aspects about Best Aspects about ClemsonClemson

Cost of livingCost of living Geographic locationGeographic location ““Sense of fit”Sense of fit” Support of colleaguesSupport of colleagues

Worse AspectsWorse Aspects

Lack of support for researchLack of support for research Tenure criteria clarityTenure criteria clarity Quality of graduate studentsQuality of graduate students Compensation, Unrelenting pressure Compensation, Unrelenting pressure

to perform, too much service/too to perform, too much service/too many assignments, and geographic many assignments, and geographic locations (tied for fourth)locations (tied for fourth)

Departmental ResultsDepartmental Results

Tenure ProcessTenure Process Highest in Engineering/Computer Highest in Engineering/Computer

Sc/Math (3.9) lowest in Education (2.3)Sc/Math (3.9) lowest in Education (2.3) Tenure Criteria Tenure Criteria

Highest in Engineering/Comp Sc/Math Highest in Engineering/Comp Sc/Math (4.1), lowest in Education (2.6)(4.1), lowest in Education (2.6)

Tenure StandardsTenure Standards Highest in Engineering group (3.6), Highest in Engineering group (3.6),

lowest in Humanities (2.3)lowest in Humanities (2.3)

Expectations regarding Expectations regarding tenuretenure

And performance as a scholarAnd performance as a scholar Physical Sciences (4.6), lowest Humanities (2.8)Physical Sciences (4.6), lowest Humanities (2.8)

And performance as a teacherAnd performance as a teacher Engineering (4.4), lowest other Professions (3.6)Engineering (4.4), lowest other Professions (3.6)

And performance as a student advisorAnd performance as a student advisor Business (4.2), lowest Humanities (3.2)Business (4.2), lowest Humanities (3.2)

And performance as a campus citizenAnd performance as a campus citizen Physical Sciences (4.6), lowest Humanities (3.2)Physical Sciences (4.6), lowest Humanities (3.2)

And as a member of the broader communityAnd as a member of the broader community Physical Sciences (4.6), lowest Humanities (3.2)Physical Sciences (4.6), lowest Humanities (3.2)

Quality and SatisfactionQuality and Satisfaction

Number of students (range 4.4 to Number of students (range 4.4 to 3.6)3.6)

Undergraduate students (range 3.9 Undergraduate students (range 3.9 to 3.4)to 3.4)

Graduate students (range 4.2 to 2.6)Graduate students (range 4.2 to 2.6)

Research and Level of Research and Level of SatisfactionSatisfaction

What’s expected as a researcher What’s expected as a researcher (range 4.0 to 2.2)(range 4.0 to 2.2)

Amount of time to conduct research Amount of time to conduct research (range 3.4 to 1.5)(range 3.4 to 1.5)

Amount of research funding expected Amount of research funding expected to find (range 3.3 to 1.8; only Business to find (range 3.3 to 1.8; only Business was above a 3.0)was above a 3.0)

Research services (range 3.5 to 1.6)Research services (range 3.5 to 1.6)

Children, family and Children, family and tenuretenure

Institutional support—having children Institutional support—having children (range from 3.7 to 1.6; only Business above (range from 3.7 to 1.6; only Business above 3.0)3.0)

Institutional support—raising children Institutional support—raising children (range 3.2 to 1.6; only Business above 3.0)(range 3.2 to 1.6; only Business above 3.0)

Departmental support—having children Departmental support—having children (range 3.6 to 2.2; all but Education above (range 3.6 to 2.2; all but Education above 3.0)3.0)

Departmental support—raising children Departmental support—raising children (range 4.0 to 3.0)(range 4.0 to 3.0)

Other AreasOther Areas

Fairness of evaluations (range 4.5 to Fairness of evaluations (range 4.5 to 3.3)3.3)

Collaboration with senior faculty Collaboration with senior faculty (range 3.7 to 2.4)(range 3.7 to 2.4)

Professional interactions with senior Professional interactions with senior faculty (range 4.0 to 2.3)faculty (range 4.0 to 2.3)

Personal interactions with senior Personal interactions with senior faculty (range 3.9 to 3.0)faculty (range 3.9 to 3.0)

Intellectual vitality of senior Intellectual vitality of senior colleagues (range 3.8 to 2.7)colleagues (range 3.8 to 2.7)

OpportunitiesOpportunities

Guidelines for Tenure and PromotionGuidelines for Tenure and Promotion Relationships between non-tenured Relationships between non-tenured

and tenured facultyand tenured faculty Research support systems Research support systems

(university, college, department)(university, college, department) Institutional support for “having Institutional support for “having

children”children”

NSSE Survey of StudentsNSSE Survey of Students

National Survey of Student National Survey of Student EngagementEngagement Academic ChallengeAcademic Challenge Supportive Campus EnvironmentSupportive Campus Environment Student-Faculty InteractionStudent-Faculty Interaction Active and Collaborative LearningActive and Collaborative Learning Enriching Educational ExperienceEnriching Educational Experience

Supportive Campus Supportive Campus EnvironmentEnvironment Both freshmen and seniors report that the Both freshmen and seniors report that the

environment helps them succeed environment helps them succeed academically and thrive socially.academically and thrive socially.

The campus environment provides help to The campus environment provides help to cope with non-academic responsibilities cope with non-academic responsibilities (work, family, etc) is significantly higher (work, family, etc) is significantly higher for freshmen.for freshmen.

Clemson freshmen and seniors rate quality Clemson freshmen and seniors rate quality of relationships with other students, of relationships with other students, faculty, and administrative personnel and faculty, and administrative personnel and offices significantly higher than both peer offices significantly higher than both peer and Carnegie institutions.and Carnegie institutions.

Academic ChallengeAcademic Challenge Students report continued high emphasis of the Students report continued high emphasis of the

mental skill, application, and the lowest order mental skill, application, and the lowest order skill, memorizing, is now significantly lower, skill, memorizing, is now significantly lower, indicating a shift toward greater emphasis on indicating a shift toward greater emphasis on higher order learning outcomes. Significant higher order learning outcomes. Significant changes in the reporting of the level of changes in the reporting of the level of coursework emphasizing coursework emphasizing

Changes in performance expectations indicate Changes in performance expectations indicate that freshmen and seniors are reading that freshmen and seniors are reading significantly fewer numbers of textbooks and significantly fewer numbers of textbooks and writing shorter papers than both peer groups, writing shorter papers than both peer groups, coming less prepared to class (not completing coming less prepared to class (not completing readings or assignments), and attending fewer readings or assignments), and attending fewer art exhibits, galleries, plays, dance, or other art exhibits, galleries, plays, dance, or other theater performances.theater performances.

Student-Faculty Student-Faculty InteractionInteraction

Clemson students are statistically significant Clemson students are statistically significant higher than peer and Carnegie institutions in higher than peer and Carnegie institutions in reporting discussions with faculty about reporting discussions with faculty about grades and receiving prompt written or oral grades and receiving prompt written or oral feedback on their academic performance. feedback on their academic performance.

Neither freshmen nor seniors score Neither freshmen nor seniors score significantly in working with a faculty significantly in working with a faculty member on a research project outside of member on a research project outside of course or program requirements. However, course or program requirements. However, with the Creative Inquiry program, a change with the Creative Inquiry program, a change is anticipated in this measure. is anticipated in this measure.

Active and Collaborative Active and Collaborative LearningLearning

Student reported activity of community-Student reported activity of community-based project (service learning) as a part of based project (service learning) as a part of a regular course continues to be significant a regular course continues to be significant for seniors and changing level of for seniors and changing level of significance for freshmen. The 2005 significance for freshmen. The 2005 freshmen were lower than freshmen NSSE freshmen were lower than freshmen NSSE students but, in 2006, freshmen have a students but, in 2006, freshmen have a significantly higher participation rate, a significantly higher participation rate, a great step for Clemson!great step for Clemson!

Seniors are significantly higher than peers Seniors are significantly higher than peers in tutoring or teaching other students. in tutoring or teaching other students.

Enriching Educational Enriching Educational ExperiencesExperiences

Scores are significantly higher than peers in Scores are significantly higher than peers in reporting the use of electronic technology to reporting the use of electronic technology to discuss or complete an assignment, using email discuss or complete an assignment, using email to communicate with an instructor, and using to communicate with an instructor, and using computers in academic work.computers in academic work.

Freshmen scores on participating in learning Freshmen scores on participating in learning communities or some other formal program communities or some other formal program where groups of students take two or more where groups of students take two or more classes together is significantly lower than both classes together is significantly lower than both peers and Carnegie institutions. With the growth peers and Carnegie institutions. With the growth of new learning communities, this score may of new learning communities, this score may change in the 2007 year.change in the 2007 year.

Enriching Educational Enriching Educational ExperiencesExperiences

Significantly lower scores than peers are Significantly lower scores than peers are in (1) having a serious conversation with in (1) having a serious conversation with students of a different race or ethnicity, students of a different race or ethnicity, (2) understanding people of other racial (2) understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds, (3) including and ethnic backgrounds, (3) including diverse perspectives (different races, diverse perspectives (different races, religions, genders, political beliefs, etc.) religions, genders, political beliefs, etc.) in class discussion or writing in class discussion or writing assignments, and (4) trying to better assignments, and (4) trying to better understand someone else’s views by understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective. her perspective.

HighlightsHighlights When asked, “If you could start over again, would you When asked, “If you could start over again, would you

go to the same institution you are now attending?” go to the same institution you are now attending?” and “How would you evaluate your entire educational and “How would you evaluate your entire educational experience at this institution?” student responses are experience at this institution?” student responses are statistically significantly higher than peer, Carnegie, statistically significantly higher than peer, Carnegie, and the total NSSE population for 2005 and 2006!and the total NSSE population for 2005 and 2006!

Students achieve significantly higher responses on Students achieve significantly higher responses on how often they (1) participated in physical fitness how often they (1) participated in physical fitness activities, and (2) participated in activities to enhance activities, and (2) participated in activities to enhance your spirituality (worship, meditation, prayer, etc).your spirituality (worship, meditation, prayer, etc).

Freshmen report quality academic advising at a Freshmen report quality academic advising at a statistically significantly higher level than peer, statistically significantly higher level than peer, Carnegie and NSSE institutions. In 2006 seniors Carnegie and NSSE institutions. In 2006 seniors were higher than selected peers.were higher than selected peers.

OpportunitiesOpportunities

Clemson is statistically lower in Clemson is statistically lower in reporting frequency of (1) coming to reporting frequency of (1) coming to class without completing readings or class without completing readings or assignments, and (2) attending an assignments, and (2) attending an art exhibit, gallery, play, dance, or art exhibit, gallery, play, dance, or other theater performance.other theater performance.

OpportunitiesOpportunities

Significantly lower than peer, Carnegie and all Significantly lower than peer, Carnegie and all NSSE institutions for 2005 and 2006 are both NSSE institutions for 2005 and 2006 are both the senior and freshmen responses to (1) the senior and freshmen responses to (1) understanding people of other racial and ethnic understanding people of other racial and ethnic backgrounds, and (2) including diverse backgrounds, and (2) including diverse perspectives (different races, religions, perspectives (different races, religions, genders, political beliefs, etc.) in class genders, political beliefs, etc.) in class discussion or writing assignments. Trying to discussion or writing assignments. Trying to better understand someone else’s views by better understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective is significantly lower for both perspective is significantly lower for both freshmen peer groups. freshmen peer groups.

Alumni SurveysAlumni Surveys General EducationGeneral Education outcomes are among the most outcomes are among the most

significant issues addressed at the undergraduate significant issues addressed at the undergraduate level. Undergraduate level. Undergraduate one-year out alumnione-year out alumni reported reported that Clemson made that Clemson made somewhatsomewhat or or veryvery significant significant contributions to:contributions to: experiencing self and social awareness (94.3%); experiencing self and social awareness (94.3%); awareness of one’s own values (92.1%);awareness of one’s own values (92.1%); ability to write clearly and effectively (91.7%); ability to write clearly and effectively (91.7%); skills required for active participation in group discussions skills required for active participation in group discussions

(90.6%); (90.6%); development of writing skills in the areas of incorporation development of writing skills in the areas of incorporation

of existing research into writing (90.2%); of existing research into writing (90.2%); exhibition of confidence/reduced apprehension in public exhibition of confidence/reduced apprehension in public

speaking (89.8%); and speaking (89.8%); and organization of thoughts when writing (89.5%).organization of thoughts when writing (89.5%).

Undergraduate One-year Undergraduate One-year OutOut

Reported that Clemson contributed Reported that Clemson contributed littlelittle or or not at allnot at all to: to: development of understanding of popular press development of understanding of popular press

articles on scientific subjects (41%); articles on scientific subjects (41%); appreciation of the arts (34.5%), appreciation of the arts (34.5%), understanding of causes of human actions understanding of causes of human actions

(29.3%); (29.3%); ability to use technical computer skills (27.7%); ability to use technical computer skills (27.7%); understanding historical and future understanding historical and future

consequences of human actions on societies consequences of human actions on societies (27.5%).(27.5%).

Undergraduate Three-Undergraduate Three-Year OutYear Out

Clemson made Clemson made littlelittle or or not at allnot at all contribution to their: contribution to their: ability to understand causes of human ability to understand causes of human

actions (21.1% compared to 29.3% for actions (21.1% compared to 29.3% for one-year out alumni); one-year out alumni);

ability to understand the historical and ability to understand the historical and future consequences of human actions future consequences of human actions on societies (23.3%compared to 27.5% on societies (23.3%compared to 27.5% for one-year out alumni). for one-year out alumni).

Graduate StudentsGraduate Students Both one- and three-year out alumni indicated Both one- and three-year out alumni indicated

that Clemson contributed that Clemson contributed littlelittle or or not at allnot at all to: to: improvement of an appreciation of historical improvement of an appreciation of historical

development at rates of 38.1% and 39.6% development at rates of 38.1% and 39.6% respectively. respectively.

instructional strategies were provided to instructional strategies were provided to teaching assistants prior to entering the teaching assistants prior to entering the classroom, one- and three-year out alumni classroom, one- and three-year out alumni responded that this responded that this nevernever or only or only sometimessometimes happened: at rates of 33.3% for one-year out and happened: at rates of 33.3% for one-year out and 52.2% for three-year out alumni.52.2% for three-year out alumni.

Graduate Students—One Graduate Students—One yearyear

Clemson University contributed Clemson University contributed littlelittle or or not at allnot at all to to

development of skills required for development of skills required for formulating and solving a thesis formulating and solving a thesis question (21.4%); andquestion (21.4%); and

laboratory facilities within their laboratory facilities within their departments (21.4%).departments (21.4%).

Graduate Students—Three Graduate Students—Three Years OutYears Out

Responded with agreement levels of Responded with agreement levels of littlelittle or or not at allnot at all to the statements to the statements advisor and student met at appropriate intervals advisor and student met at appropriate intervals

to discuss work (29.8%); to discuss work (29.8%); advisor helped set goals that were clear and advisor helped set goals that were clear and

reasonable (31.3%); reasonable (31.3%); student had a professor who served as mentor student had a professor who served as mentor

(35.4%);(35.4%); exposure to multiple disciplines and research exposure to multiple disciplines and research

scholars working within these disciplines scholars working within these disciplines (27.7%);and (27.7%);and

contributed to ability to devise and perform contributed to ability to devise and perform experiments (27.1%). experiments (27.1%).

Other AreasOther Areas Academic advisingAcademic advising issues such as meeting an issues such as meeting an

advisor on a regular basis, help with the setting advisor on a regular basis, help with the setting of appropriate goals, and development of a of appropriate goals, and development of a mentoring relationship with a faculty advisor mentoring relationship with a faculty advisor received negative comments (received negative comments (littlelittle or or not at not at allall) at rates ranging from 28.7% all the way up ) at rates ranging from 28.7% all the way up to 39.4%. to 39.4%.

Administrative servicesAdministrative services such as on-line such as on-line registration, billing and tuition payments, registration, billing and tuition payments, enrollment certification, and the utility and enrollment certification, and the utility and accuracy of degree progress reports were accuracy of degree progress reports were generally viewed favorably.generally viewed favorably.

SummarySummary

OpportunitiesOpportunities The scores for both freshmen and senior are The scores for both freshmen and senior are

not statistically significantly different not statistically significantly different regarding Clemson’s environment of regarding Clemson’s environment of encouraging contact among students from encouraging contact among students from different economic, social, racial, and ethnic different economic, social, racial, and ethnic backgrounds. It must be noted that student backgrounds. It must be noted that student responses are not different from those of responses are not different from those of peers in the extent to which the institution peers in the extent to which the institution emphasizes encouraging contact among emphasizes encouraging contact among students from different economic, social, and students from different economic, social, and racial or ethnic backgrounds. From these racial or ethnic backgrounds. From these data, one could reason that the institutional data, one could reason that the institutional environment is ripe for student interactions environment is ripe for student interactions that are not being reported as taking place. that are not being reported as taking place.