Faculty survey shows most like their quality-of-life

BY RAY DELGADO

Some feel overworked and undersupported, and most say that living in the expensive Bay Area adds stress to their lives. But when all is said and done, more than two-thirds of faculty report that they are satisfied or very satisfied with their positions at Stanford, and only 5 percent say they would not choose the university again.

Vice Provost for Faculty Development Pat Jones highlighted survey results at the Faculty Senate meeting last week. Photo: L.A. Cicero

A faculty quality-of-life survey conducted last spring painted a fairly bright picture of how faculty feel about the university, their jobs, their colleagues and the impact of work on their personal lives.

An initial look at the survey results was released last week at the Faculty Senate meeting. The study was done as part of the work of the Provost's Advisory Committee on the Status of Women Faculty (PACSWF). More detailed analysis of responses by gender will be presented in a committee report scheduled for March.

The analysis of the survey was carried out by Pat Jones, vice provost for faculty development, along with education Professor Milbrey McLaughlin, political science Professor Norman Nie and research assistants at the Stanford Institute for the Quantitative Study of Society.

"I am grateful to all of the faculty who took the time to complete the survey," said Provost John Etchemendy. "We will study the results carefully because we believe it is essential to do everything we can do to make Stanford not only a vibrant intellectual environment for faculty and students but also a good work environment for faculty and staff."

Overall, the survey presented a very positive outlook from faculty, even though the findings highlighted a few areas where faculty want to see improvement, Jones said. Although the survey produced some findings that concern university officials, the open feedback section included an array of positive findings, she said.

"Stanford is a wonderful place and I think that came out in the qualitative responses," Jones said. "Enthusiasm for our students and faculty colleagues was really remarkable."

More than 1,700 faculty at all levels were asked to take the survey last spring, and just under half (49 percent) returned it. Overall, the responses were largely representative of the various faculty ranks and racial and ethnic groups, although women were overrepresented based on their actual makeup of overall faculty; they composed 26 percent of respondents, whereas they represent only 23 percent of the faculty.

The Graduate School of Business had a low response rate, as did the clinical sciences. Faculty from the School of Earth Sciences and the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center were combined with those from the School of Humanities and Sciences because of their small numbers.

When asked if they were satisfied with their positions at the university, 68 percent of the faculty reported being "satisfied" or "very satisfied," compared with 20 percent who responded "dissatisfied" or "very dissatisfied." The responses were very similar when broken down by rank, faculty line and gender. White and non-white respondents also reported similar satisfaction levels, with approximately 64 percent of non-whites saying they were "satisfied" or "very satisfied," compared with 69 percent for whites.

When asked if they would choose to be a faculty member at Stanford again, 63 percent said yes, 32 percent said they would have second thoughts and only 5 percent said they would not choose Stanford again.

Sixty-seven percent of faculty "agreed" or "strongly agreed" with the statement that the high cost of living caused them stress, compared with 20 percent who disagreed. Seventy-two percent of women "agreed" or "strongly agreed" with this statement, compared with 66 percent of men; 79 percent of non-white respondents agreed compared with 65 percent of white respondents. By rank, 86 percent of assistant professors "agreed" or "strongly agreed" with the statement, compared with 75 percent of associate professors and 56 percent of full professors.

The survey also asked faculty to categorize how they spend their time between teaching, advising and mentoring, administrative tasks, research/scholarship, and clinical work. Overall, faculty reported spending about 60 hours per week on their work responsibilities, and about 57 percent felt that workload was "high" or "much too high," as opposed to "much too low," "low" or "about right."

Male and female respondents reported about the same number of hours worked per week, but 68 percent of women considered their workload "high" or "much too high," compared with 53 percent of men. Non-white respondents reported working slightly more than white respondents (62 hours versus 59), and 70 percent of the non-white respondents thought the workload was high compared to 54 percent of white respondents.

Within schools or divisions, engineering respondents appeared to be the most concerned about their workload. Sixty-nine percent said their workload was "high" or "much too high", whereas only 30 percent of respondents in the Graduate School of Business and 40 percent of law school respondents said they felt the same way.

Jones said she thought faculty workload levels were similar to that at most other top universities, and that the responses showed a bit of ambivalence that many faculty have about their workload versus their personal lives.

"You have to put in a high number of hours to get to the top of your field, and most faculty know that," Jones said. "Most faculty, like everyone else, have hobbies and families and would like to do other things. But most of us love what we do and are driven to succeed, and that translates into higher hours."

Faculty were also asked a variety of questions about the support they receive within their academic units and the overall environment and, when several questions were combined in a unit support index, on a 0-1 optimal scale, the results indicate that faculty feel only moderately supported. By rank, full professors reported the most sense of support with a .43 score, followed by assistant professors at .41 and associate professors feeling the least supported at .35. Females felt less supported than males (.39 versus .42), and non-whites felt less supported than whites (.38 versus .42).

When asked if they had received adequate information to succeed as a faculty member, 41 percent of associate professors answered negatively, compared with 34 percent of assistant professors. When asked the same question about professional development, 42 percent of associate professors answered negatively compared with 37 percent of assistant professors.

Jones said she was somewhat surprised by the "support" responses and said she hoped that various schools would make sure their faculty are more aware of departmental, school and university policies and practices.

"We need to look into where those responses are coming from," Jones said. "What we are trying to do is make sure that the way the university conducts reappointment and promotion reviews is clear so that everyone understands it. If [faculty] understand the nature of the review, they'll understand better what they need to do."

When asked to respond to the statement "I feel fairly compensated in relation to equivalent colleagues in my unit," 42 percent agreed or strongly agreed, and 35 percent "disagreed" or "strongly disagreed." The rest were neutral.

Forty-four percent of men "agreed" or "strongly agreed" with the fair compensation statement compared to only 32 percent of women. Forty-four percent of women reported feeling unfairly compensated in relation to equivalent colleagues in their unit. Jones said that compensation matters are the subject of a separate analysis being undertaken by the PACSWF subcommittee.

Faculty reported high marks for collegiality, with the vast majority agreeing that they felt respected by the head of their unit (73 percent), by other faculty (79 percent), by staff (89 percent) and by students (91 percent).

Senate approves Bioengineering degree program.

The senate also unanimously approved the Bioengineering Department to admit candidates for the Master of Science and the Doctor of Philosophy degrees, without limit of time. Enrollment begins in Autumn Quarter.

The department is based in the Clark Center, and school officials hope to build up the graduate degree program from about 15 students in the first year to around 200 students by the time the department is fully formed. The department also plans to offer an undergraduate degree program in three to four years and similarly build up to a base of about 200 students.