Senior Faculty Career Attitudes: Implications for Faculty Development

Satisfaction

General satisfaction levels are high. Nearly half (47%) of all respondents reported being “very satisfied” with their faculty careers; most of the others (44%) reported being “somewhat satisfied,” while less than 10% indicated they were “not very satisfied” or “not at all satisfied.” These percentages did not differ significantly by either institution or discipline. Further, fully 87% of respondents reported their careers to be at least as satisfying as they had expected upon entry into the profession, although significant differences were found by discipline, ranging from 70% among the humanities faculty to more than 90% of those in the health professions. Eighty-two percent of all respondents would “probably’’ choose a faculty career again.

As expected, ratings of overall satisfaction were significantly related (at either .001 or .01) to many other survey variables. Positive correlations with satisfaction included satisfaction with use of abilities, satisfaction with advancement, degree to which faculty found their current lives rewarding, rank, time devoted to faculty roles, perceived influence, consistency of interest in a specialty area since graduate school, perception of when their best work was done, anticipated retirement age, and personal health. Inverse correlations with satisfaction were found with the extent to which faculty were feeling “stuck” in their careers, the extent to which they questioned whether “this is all there is,” feelings of restlessness, interest in or chances of moving to another institution or career, and existence of unmet goals.

Variables not related significantly to overall satisfaction included: years as a faculty member and years at current rank; importance of research to the institution; effort compared to others in the discipline; most important accomplishments, by type (teaching, research, service); and all demographic variables.

To determine which combination of responses best predicted overall satisfaction, we undertook a stepwise multiple regression analysis, using overall satisfaction as the criterion variable. A total of 16 predictor variables emerged from this analysis (p .05), accounting for 71% of the variance in satisfaction (Table 1). Not surprisingly, the strongest single predictor was the extent to which the respondent’s career had met or exceeded expectations. Of the next four variables, three (amount of recognition from administration, perceived influence in the department or school, and satisfaction with standard of living) reflected characteristics of the institutional environment, while one (career stuckness) reflected a more personal assessment. These five variables together accounted for 57% of the total variance in satisfaction.

Personal and Career Matters

Career History. Confirming findings by Sorcinelli (1985) and Fuhrmann, Armour, Wergin, and Janha (1988), survey faculty in the humanities decided to enter academe earliest (55% in undergraduate school or earlier), and those in the professions decided latest (70% in graduate school or later). For all respondents, either the desire to teach or the attraction of the academic lifestyle was most often highlighted as the single most important motivator in their decision to become professors, with significant differences by discipline (X2 = 128.86; p .001).

Compared to other fields, a larger percentage of faculty in the humanities (40%) were motivated by the desire to teach, while a larger percentage of social scientists ranked academic lifestyle (35%) as their major motivator. A consistent minority of faculty (11% to 15%) in the natural sciences, social sciences, and health professions also listed the opportunity or the desire to do research as the single most important motivator in making their initial career decisions.

Professional Activity and Accomplishments. These senior faculty reported that they spend about 50 hours a week on the job. Significant differences were found by disciplines (F = 13.93; p .001). Faculty in the humanities and the health professions indicated they spend the greatest number of hours (53) working, while those in other professions the fewest (45). The respondents invest about the same level of effort as when they first received tenure. They spend about 45% of their time in teaching, 24% in service, 21% in research, and 8% in other creative/scholarly activities. Significant differences were found among the disciplines for each of the major categories of effort. Among the disciplines, humanities faculty spend the most time teaching; health professionals spend the most in service; natural scientists spend the most in research; and other professionals spend the most in other scholarly/creative activities. In contrast, the health professionals spend the lowest percentage of their time teaching, other professionals in research, and natural scientists in other creative/scholarly activity.

Across the board, senior faculty reported remaining active in teaching, serving, and researching. Within the last five years a majority of these faculty have published articles (77%), taught new courses (68%), received outside funding (63%), acted as paid consultants (60%), experimented with alternative teaching methods (60%), and served in elected or appointed posts in professional organizations (53%).

Overall the respondents rated themselves “very good” to “excellent” in teaching, “very good” in service, “good” to “very good” in research, and “very good” in other creative/scholarly activities. About two-thirds of the respondents felt their immediate supervisors would rate them “better than average” compared to other faculty in their divisions; 80% agreed with this rating.

When looking at these same components of their work, the respondents see teaching as “very important” and service as “somewhat important” to them. Teaching was viewed as less important to the institution than to the respondents themselves, while the reverse was true for research activities.

Ninety-three percent believe they have at least equal control with outside forces over their career, with 68% feeling they control most or all of their careers. Despite this feeling of control, 42% of the respondents indicated that since being awarded tenure, they have felt “stuck” at some point in their academic career development. A greater percentage of faculty in the humanities (55%) than in the other disciplines had this sense of “stuckness” (X2 = 17.66; p < .01). Factors the respondents gave most often that contributed to this feeling of “stuckness” were lack of funding, diminished energy, conflicts with administration, being outside the “in group,” an unchanging work environment, and lack of intellectual stimulation and opportunity.

When faculty were asked to list their most important professional accomplishments, 53% of the entries dealt with teaching-related activities, 25% with research/scholarly activities, 11% with service-related activities, and 11% with other activities. Significant differences were found among the disciplines (X2 = 56.85; p < .001). A larger percentage of faculty in the humanities (62%) and in the other professions (58%) indicated “teaching” more often, while a larger percentage of faculty in the natural (43%) and social (33%) sciences listed “research.”

Almost two-thirds (63%) of the respondents indicated they had developed a “niche” for themselves within the institution; of these, 28% listed an area related to teaching, 22% to service, 17% to research/scholarship, and 33% to other areas. Over half (55%) indicated they had developed a niche beyond the institution; of these, 7% related to teaching, 17% to service, 17% to research/scholarship; and 60% related to other areas. Only a small percentage of the respondents (15%) indicated they had already done their best work; and others indicated either that they were currently doing their best work (43%) or that their best work was still ahead of them (42%). A significantly greater percentage of those in the social sciences (51%) and the humanities (48%) than in the other disciplines believed their best work is yet to be done (X2 = 18.73; p < .01).

Career/Life Issues. These faculty, with a mean age of 50, are experiencing traditional midlife issues. A majority agrees that they are examining their lives more now (65%), that they are more committed to their work (70%), that they are thinking about their legacies (66%), that they feel more vital (59%), that they are concerned about the amount of time they have left in life (56%), and that their work loads are heavier (63%). A majority disagrees that “this is all there is in life” (65%), that they are becoming bored (72%), and that they feel very restless in their careers (69%). They are split evenly on whether they have more opportunities for continued growth and development than they have had previously. On issues concerning the relationship between their professional and personal lives, they are split evenly on whether the most important things in their lives involve work, and a slender majority (53%), except for the humanities faculty (63%), agrees that it is difficult to draw the line between work and leisure. The respondents tend to agree that their moods depend on how their work is going (67%) and that other things (e.g., personal/family life) in life are more important than work (73%), even though 60% also agrees that they tend to subordinate other aspects of their lives to their work.

When asked to describe their lives right now, most tended toward the adjectives “interesting,” “enjoyable,” “worthwhile,” “full,” “hopeful,” “free,” and “rewarding.” They also described themselves as “overworked” and “pressured.” None of these descriptions varied significantly by discipline.

Disciplinary Differences

We have learned a great deal about how faculty live their lives differently depending on their disciplines. Very few of the other studies of faculty have taken disciplinary differences into account, yet these differences may help to explain many of the tensions in campus climate. Put simply, members of different disciplines lead different professional lives. They place their emphases differently; they are motivated differently; and they find different avenues to satisfaction. Nevertheless, most studies of faculty have presented the professoriate as if it were a single homogeneous group.

Areas of commonality do exist among the disciplines. There are no significant differences by discipline in overall satisfaction. There also are no significant differences by discipline in interests in moving to another institution, in making plans to leave present institutions, or in expected retirement age.

On the other hand, there are areas of significance which help us identify a profile of faculty by discipline:

Humanities faculty. Of all the disciplines they are most likely to

• spend the highest number of hours per week on the job;

• devote the highest percentage of this time to teaching;

• have been motivated to enter the profession by the desire to teach;

• list teaching as their most important accomplishment;

• say that it is difficult to draw a line between work and leisure;

• collaborate least with colleagues;

• say they are stuck in their present jobs;

• claim that there is a gap between their expectations for the profession and the reality.

• Social Scientists. Of all the disciplines they are most likely to

• have been motivated to enter the profession by the academic lifestyle;

• list research as their most important accomplishment;

• want to do further research in the future.

• Natural Scientists. Of all the disciplines they are most likely to

• devote the highest percentage of their time to research;

• list research as their most important accomplishment (with social scientists);

• find their institutional community with colleagues from various departments other than their own (with the humanities and natural science faculty);

• report working less hard than others in their disciplines;

• maintain that they are least likely to hold jobs outside the academy.

• Health Professionals. Of all the disciplines they are most likely to

• spend the most hours working per week (with the humanities faculty);

• devote the highest percentage of their jobs to service and the lowest percentage to teaching;

• move to other institutions;

• spend an extra five hours a week in leisure or family activities;

• collaborate with colleagues on professional matters;

• discover high correspondence between expectations for the profession and the reality.

• Other professionals. Of all the disciplines they are most likely to

• work the least number of hours per week (still far above the national work week of forty hours);

• devote the highest percentage of their hours to creative/other scholarly activities and the least amount to research;

• spend five extra hours a week in leisure and family activities (with health professionals).

Minority Differences

For the purpose of this report all minorities (Asians, Blacks, Native Americans, and Hispanics) were grouped together to give a sufficiently large sample. A more detailed analysis of racial and gender differences in responses can be found in Armour, Fuhrmann, and Wergin, (1990). There was no difference in overall satisfaction between minority faculty and their white colleagues. There were, however, some significant differences on specific items.

Minority faculty have been at their institutions significantly less time than their white colleagues and spend less time in their roles as faculty each week. They are more likely to decide to enter the profession out of a desire to help others. They believe that their institutions value teaching and service more highly and research less highly. They personally rank service and research higher to themselves. They are twice as likely to be making plans to leave their current institutions and to move to different careers. They are more inclined to believe they work harder than others in their disciplines. They are less satisfied with the quality of their higher administrations and more satisfied with their students. They are less satisfied in seeing the results of their work, but they agree that they are thinking about leaving legacies. They disagree more that it is difficult to draw a line between work and leisure. They are more inclined to find life “easy,” “free,” and “easy going.” They are most inclined to find their institutional communities in their institution as a whole rather than in their departments. They are almost twice as likely to be responsible for a dependent adult.

In sum, minorities gave significantly different responses from white colleagues on 26 of 132 comparisons.

Gender Differences

While, again, there was no difference in overall satisfaction, of the 132 comparisons women gave significantly different responses from male colleagues on 65 items (49%). Women have spent less time at their institutions, less time in rank, and less time tenured. They tend to be at the lower ranks and to concentrate in the professional disciplines rather than the natural sciences. They spend a higher percentage of their time teaching and less doing research; and, not surprisingly, they rank teaching more important and research less important to themselves personally. They are more likely to believe that their most important accomplishments lie in teaching rather than research or service. They rate themselves better teachers and servers and worse researchers. They are less likely to claim higher than average influence within their institutions, and they are less likely to believe they have niches at their institutions. They rate their chances of moving to other careers higher. They are more likely to claim they spend more time working now than when they entered the profession. They are more satisfied than male colleagues with their recognition from students — but less satisfied with a wide variety of aspects of professional and personal life: use of abilities, pursuit of professional interests, use of time, professional collaboration, advancement, physical working conditions, job security, teaching load, use of leisure time, and community service. Nevertheless, they are more likely to say that their lives are “worthwhile,” “full,” and “rewarding,” but that they are “overworked” and “pressured.” Personally, they are most likely to find their social communities from people from within their departments. Given five additional hours a week, women are more likely than men to wish to spend it on personal leisure and less likely to wish to spend it with their families. They are more likely to anticipate retiring early, to have never married, to have no children at home, and to have no responsibility for a dependent adult.

Since women differ significantly from their male colleagues on nearly half of the survey items, it is clear that the genders see the profession quite differently. Both men and women are generally satisfied with the profession, but women are attracted to different aspects of the job and frustrated by some of the key components of the academy.