Faculty Survey 2007-2008
Teaching Faculty Responders
Prepared by Mary Ann Weaver and Max Shannon
April 20, 2009

The tables below show the demographics of the teaching faculty who responded to the HERI Faculty Survey given during the 07-08 academic year. Tables 16 and 17 show sources of stress for these faculty and some general activities.

Links to tables

Table 1: Age Table 10: Highest degree earned
Table 2: Ethnicity Table 11: Major of highest degree
Table 3: Marital status Table 12: Year of highest degree earned
Table 4: Children Table 13: Tenure status
Table 5: Citizenship Table 14: Salary
Table 6: Academic family members Table 15: Satisfaction with salary
Table 7: Political views Table 16: Sources of stress
Table 8: Year of appointment Table 17: General activities
Table 9: Academic rank  

Table 1: Age
Earlham
All institutions
Peer Group
 
%
%

%
Under 30
3.1
1.6
2.6
30 to 40
29.2
18.7
23.1
40-60
52.3
57.7
58.3
Over 60
15.4
22.0
15.8

Earlham teaching faculty respondents were somewhat younger than the respondents from other institutions, but closer in age to teaching faculty from the peer group.

Table 2: Ethnicity
Earlham
All institutions
Peer Group
 
%
%

%
White/Caucasian
77.8
88.6
86.5
African American/Black
11.1
2.8
3.1
Asian American/Asian
7.9
4.5
5.7
American Indian/Alaska Native
1.6
1.7
1.3
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
1.6
.3
0
Mexican American/Chicano
1.6
1.1
1.5
Puerto Rican
1.6
.3
.5
Other Latino
1.6
1.8
3.1
Other
4.8
2.6
3.0

Earlham teaching faculty respondents showed more racial diversity than other institutions.

Table 3: Marital Status

Earlham men
Earlham women

Earlham Total

All institutions
Peer Group
Are you currently:
%
%
%
%

%
Married
76.9
57.7
69.2
76.8
78.0
Single
12.8
11.5
12.3
10.8
9.6
Divorced
7.7
19.2
12.3
5.8
3.8
Unmarried, living with partner
2.6
3.8
3.1
4.5
6.7
Widowed
0
3.8
1.5
1.4
.7
Separated
0
3.8
1.5
.7
1.2

A question about marital status revealed that Earlham teaching faculty respondents were less likely to be married than the respondents from the national sample and the sample from our peer group institutions.

Table 4: Children

 

Earlham
All institutions

Peer Group

Children under 18
%
%
%
None
59.4
62.5
54.5
One
25
16.4
21.3
Two
14.1
15.1
19.4
Three
1.6
4.3
4.6
Four
0
1.7
.3
Children 18 years or older
None
62.5
55.3
68.0
One
9.4
12.9
11.6
Two
23.4
19.2
15.0
Three
3.1
7.8
3.7
Four
1.6
4.8
1.7

Table 5: Citizenship

Earlham
All institutions
Peer Group
 
%
%

%
U.S.
90.8
93.6
93.3
Born in U.S. ?
84.6
85.3
84.6

Table 6: Relatives in academic
Earlham men
Earlham women
Earlham
All institutions
Peer Group
Is (or was) your:          
Spouse/partner an academic?
33.3
46.2
38.5
31.9
41.4
Father an academic?
23.1
19.2
21.5
13.3
16.6
Mother an academic?
15.4
19.2
16.9
8.0
9.7

Earlham teaching faculty were more likely to have fathers and/or mothers with careers in education.

Table 7: Political views
Earlham men
Earlham women
Earlham
All institutions
Peer Group
 
%
%
%
%

%
Far left
13.2
19.2
15.6
8.8
17.0
Liberal
57.9
61.5
59.4
47.0
59.0
Middle of the road
21.1
15.4
18.7
28.4
17.8
Conservative
7.9
3.8
6.3
15.2
5.7
Far right
0
0
0
.7
.4


The political views of teaching faculty at Earlham and at our peer institutions are more strongly liberal or far left compared to teachers nationwide

.

Table 8: Year of Appointment
Earlham
All institutions
Peer Group
Before 1970
1.6
3.3
3.4
1971-1980
12.6
9.6
10.8
1981-1990
17.2
18.7
23.3
1991-2000
23.4
28.2
28.3
2001-2007
45.3
40.2
34.3

Many of the respondents were recent hires at their present institution. 45.3% of Earlham respondents accepted their current appointment during the previous 6 years. The same was true for 40.2% of respondents nationwide and 34.3% at our peer institution.

Table 9: Academic Rank

 

Earlham Teaching Faculty

All Institutions

Peer

 

Male

Female

Total

Male

Female

Total

Group
 
%
%
%
%
%
%
%

Professor
36.8
30.8
34.4
39.5
19.7
31.7
39.3

Assoc. Prof
15.8
7.7
12.5
25.9
26.3
26.1
28.7

Asst. Prof.
34.2
38.5
35.9
23.7
33.2
27.4
28.1

Lecturer
0
0
0
5.7
9.5
7.2
1.5

Instructor
13.2
23.1
17.2
5.2
11.3
7.6
2.4


Gender differences are evident when looking at the percentage of Earlham female professors compared to female professors from all institutions.

Table 10: Highest degree earned
Earlham men
Earlham women
Earlham total
All institutions
Peer Group
%
%
%
%
%
Ph.D. or terminal degree
69.2
65.4
67.7
71.5
87.9
Master's
17.9
26.9
21.5
19.7
8.7
Bachelor's
7.7
7.7
7.7
1.0
.3

Looking at the Earlham teaching faculty who chose to respond to the survey, Earlham had the greatest percentage of faculty with a Master's degree, and a lower percentage having a Ph.D. or terminal degree compared to the nationwide sample and the peer group.

Table 11: Major of Highest Degree

Earlham

All Institutions

Peer

Male

Female

Total

Male

Female

Total

Group
%
%
%
%
%
%
%

Agriculture or Forestry
0
0
0
1.5
.5
1.1
0

Biological Sciences
12.9
3.8
9.2
9.3
6
7.9
8.8

Business
2.6
3.8
3.1
6.8
4.9
6.0
.5

Education
12.9
3.8
9.1
8.2

15.9
11.2
2.2

Engineering
2.6
0
1.5
6.4
1.2
4.3
.5

English
5.1
15.4
9.2
5.6
8.7
6.8
8.9

Health-related
0
0
0
2.5
11.4
6.0
.2

History or Political Science
7.7
7.6
7.7
7.4
5.2
6.5
10.7

Humanities
13
23
16.8
22
27
23.1
20.5

Fine Arts
5.2
11.4
7.7

8.8
8.5
8.7
13.1

Mathematics or Statistics
0
0
0
6.1
2.7
4.8
6.0

Physical Sciences
12.8
11.5
12.4
16.2
6.7
12.5
10.4

Social Sciences
18
11.4
15.2
12.8
13.5
13.0
16.2

Other Technical
5.1
0
3.1
2.6
1.3
.2
1.0

Other Non-Technical
2.6
7.6
4.5
4.6
6.0
5.2
.9

The national sample had a greater percentage of faculty with a health-related degree than both the peer group and Earlham. Earlham also had no faculty respondents with a mathematics or agriculture degree. The peer group had less responding faculty with degrees in education, engineering and business, but the greatest percentage of faculty with degrees in the social sciences and history or political science. Earlham had a slightly higher percentage of faculty holding degrees in english and biological science than either the peer group or the national sample.

Table 12: Year Highest Degree Earned  

Earlham

All Institutions

Peer

Male

Female

Total

Male

Female

Total

Group
 
%
%
%
%
%
%
%

Before 1970
0
0
0
8.0
2.2
5.7
3.6

1971 to 1975
10.3
7.7
9.2
9.5
3.9
7.3
6.5

1976 to 1980
20.5
11.5
16.9
11.3
7.5
9.8
8.9

1981 to 1985
12.8
0
7.7
11.7
9.0
10.7
12.8

1986 to 1990
0
23.1
9.2
12.2
12.9
12.5
15.1

1991 to 1995
12.8
15.4
13.8
12.3
16.2
13.9
15.2

1996 to 2000

23.1
11.5
18.5
15.1
18.9
16.6
14.2

2001 to 2005
17.9
19.2
18.5
15.4
22.0
18.0
17.6

2006 to 2007
2.6
11.5
6.2
4.5
7.5
5.7
6.1
The male teaching staff at Earlham tended to earn their degrees earlier than the female teaching staff, with neither receiving their degree earlier than 1971. Although Earlham's responding faculty had a higher percentage of degrees earned from 1976 to 1980 than other institutions, Earlham also had a high percentage of females with degrees earned more recently.

  Table 13: Tenure

Earlham

All Institutions

Peer

Male

Female

Total

Male

Female

Total

Group
Tenured
51.3
40.0
46.9
61.6
43.5
54.4
65.7
On tenure track, but not tenured
28.2
36.0
31.3
20.1
26.0
22.4
23.3
Not on tenure track
20.5
24.0
21.9
15.0
26.7

19.6
10.9
Institution has no tenure system
0
0
0
3.4
3.8
3.5
0

In both the national and Earlham samples, male faculty were more likely to be tenured than the female faculty. The sample from our peer institutions had a higher percentage of tenured faculty responding to the survey.

Table 14: Salary for 9/10 month contract

Earlham

All Institutions

Peer

Male

Female

Total

Male

Female

Total

Group
%
%
%
%
%
%

%
Less than $20,000
8.7
0
5.3
1.9
2.1
2.0
1.5
$20,000 to $29,999
0
6.7
2.6
.4
1.1
.7
.2
$30,000 to $39,999
0
0
0
3.5
6.7
4.8
.9
$40,000 to $49,999
21.7
13.3
18.4
11.8
18.7
14.5
4.4
$50,000 to $59,999
21.7
33.3
26.3
18.4
27.8
22.1
1638
$60,000 to $69,999
13.0
13.3
13.2
15.8
18.3
16.8
20.8
$70,000 to $79,999
17.4
26.7
21.1
13.8
10.4
12.5
17.6
$80,000 to $89,999
13.0
6.7
10.5
10.7
6.1
8.9
11.9
$90,000 to $99,999
4.3
0
2.6
8.4
4.4
6.8
8.8
$100,000 to $124,999
0
0
0
11.2
3.4
8.1
14.8
$125,000 to $149,999
0
0
0
2.3
.7
1.7
1.5
$150,000 or more
0
0
0
1.7
.3
1.2
.9

The survey question relating to salary was broken down between 9/10 month contracts and 11/12 month contracts. Roughly 60% of the teaching faculty at Earlham and at our peer institutions indicated they were on a 9/10 month contract. Salaries over $100,000 were reported at our peer group institutions and from the national sample, but not from the Earlham respondents. However 34.2% of Earlham respondents reported salaries in the $70,000-$99,999 range.

Table 15: Satisfaction with salary

Earlham

All Institutions

Peer

Male

Female

Total

Male

Female

Total

Group
Satisfied with salary
53.8
42.3
49.2
48.9
41.9
46.2
62.0

Males were more likely to be satisfied with their salary. The peer group sample was more satisfied with their salaries than the Earlham or national samples.

Table 16: Sources of stress

Factors noted as a source of stress (Somewhat-extensive)

Earlham

All Institutions

Peer

Male

Female

Total

Male

Female

Total

Group
%
%
%
%
%
%

%
Household responsibilities
74.4
73.1
73.8
67.6
80.5
72.7
81.4
Child care
30.8
30.8
30.8
30.7
31.2
30.9
41.3
Care of elderly parent
38.5
23.1
32.3
30.9
37.6
33.5
33.4
Own physical health
51.3
46.2
49.2
46.7
53.9
49.5
48.3
Health of spouse/partner
38.5
11.5
27.7
38.9
31.4
35.9
32.9
Review process
43.6
42.3
43.1
46.6
57.9
51.1
47.6
Subtle discrimination
15.4
34.6
23.1
18.2
38.7
26.3
28.4
Personal finances
59
57.7
58.5
61.3
65.2
62.8
62.2
Committee work
56.4
46.2
52.3
59.3
64.8
61.5
63.0
Faculty meetings
61.5
42.3
53.8
51.0
56.2
53.0
46.4
Research or publishing demands
35.9
38.5
36.9
61.1
65.0
62.7
70.1
Institutional procedures
51.3
50.0
50.8
72.0
71.5
71.8
60.3
Teaching load
48.7
53.8
50.8
59.6
69.1
63.3
69.3
Children's problems
28.2
30.8
29.2
31.7
30.9
31.4
35.3
Marital friction
20.5
19.2
20.0
27.4
24.6
26.3
30.0
Lack of personal time
74.4
84.6
78.5
67.8
83.7
74.1
82.4
Keeping up with technology
48.7
61.5
53.8
48.3
59.4
52.7
48.6
Job security
28.2
26.9
27.7
28.3
39.3
32.6
28.4
Being part of a dual career couple
38.5
42.3
40.0
40.5
47.8
43.4
58.1
Self-imposed high expectations
84.6
92.3
87.7
77.0
84.8
80.1
84.2
Change in work responsibilities
51.3
42.3
47.7
40.6
55.3
46.4
41.7
Working with under prepared students
59.0
69.2
63.1
59.0
64.5
61.1
47.4

Sources of stress for Earlham faculty differed dramatically by gender when looking at lack of personal time and keeping up with technology. Female faculty at Earlham were much more likely to consider these factors stressful compared to the males. Care of an elderly parent, health of spouse/partner and faculty meetings were greater sources of stress for the male teaching faculty at Earlham.

The review process was more stressful for faculty nationwide compared to Earlham faculty, however keeping up with technology was stressful for a higher percentage of Earlham faculty compared to faculty nationwide. Being part of a dual career couple was a source of stress for 52.5% of Earlham teaching faculty compared to only 35.2% nationwide. Research and/or publishing demands are much more likely to be a source of stress for faculty at our peer institutions.

Table 17: General Activities

Earlham men Earlham women
Earlham
All Institutions
Peer Group
%
%
%
%
%
Have you been sexually harassed at this institution
0
7.7
3.1
5.4
6.2
Are you a member of a faculty union
0
0
0
21.5
4.9
Do you plan to retire within the next 3 years
13.2
3.8
9.4
13.1
7.0
Do you use your scholarship to address local community needs?
59.0
42.3
52.3
47.1
27.3
Have you ever received an award for outstanding teaching?
25.6
26.9
26.2
42.5
33.9
 
During the past two years have you...
Received at least one firm job offer
28.2
11.5
21.5
23.9
19.9
Considered early retirement
20.5
11.5
16.9
21.2
20.3
Considered leaving academe for another job
23.1
34.6
27.7
32.7
29.2
Considered leaving this institution for another
41.0
38.5
40.0
46.5
46.0
Changed academic institutions
17.9
15.4
16.9
11.4
12.5
Engaged in paid consulting outside of your institution
23.1
26.9
24.6
37.6
27.9
Engaged in public service/professional consulting without pay
64.1
46.2
56.9
59.4
43.4

Fewer Earlham faculty engaged in paid consulting outside of their institution compared to the national and peer group sample, but more Earlham faculty engaged in professional consulting without pay.

Additional Faculty Survey reports

Teaching faculty activities
Includes national and peer group comparison data relating to teaching methods, experiences, and hours per week spent on various activities

Teaching faculty goals and opinions

 Includes prior year comparisons as well as current year national and peer group comparison data for teaching and personal goals, attributes of the institution, and job satisfaction

Administrative faculty

 Responses from administrative faculty regarding personal goals, institutional attributes, and job satisfaction. Includes comparison data from private 4-year colleges.

Administrative/teaching faculty comparisons

 Compares responses of Earlham teaching faculty with Earlham administrative faculty.

IR Home

Created by Mary Ann Weaver
April 30, 2009