New report says cluster hiring can lead to increased faculty diversity
Hiring faculty around interdisciplinary themes appears to have a positive impact on diversity and May 1, faculty member often worked to ensure the cluster met its goals. in Hispanic faculty members and a 3 percent increase in female faculty. the lead of professors, since silos may form without their buy-in. Author manuscript; available in PMC Nov 1. Published in final edited form as: A steady increase in the number and percentage of female faculty and . women in medicine programs is simply finding time for busy academicians to meet. We have over 45 women faculty members and are growing this number every year.
Are medical school faculty prepared to teach 21st century skills to future physicians? Shaping your curricular identity. Scholarly Collaboration at a Distance: Building bridges between educators and student affairs. Kay D, Berry A. Professional development in social media initiative. Identifying teaching trends across class and specialty.
Austin, TX, November 2 — 6, Integration of pharmacotherapy education into an internal medicine clerkship geriatrics home visiting program. Approaches to academic detailing in two community-based medical schools. Bailey M, Berry A. Developing a digital presence: The use of Twitter as a professional development tool. Integration of geriatrics by student peer mentors into an anatomy curriculum.
A new twist on geri-anatomy curriculum. Whether the clusters targeted junior or senior faculty members depended on their goals. Arizona State University and Florida International University, for example, focused on senior hires to build research prominence. Clusters aimed at increasing diversity or interdisciplinary collaboration skewed more junior. What about management of the clusters?
Some institutions created formal mechanisms for collaborations, such as discussion groups, conferences or team teaching. A cluster coordinator or designated faculty member often worked to ensure the cluster met its goals.
But other institutions offered little structure beyond the initial hiring agreement with the cluster members, and their clusters were ultimately less successful. The committee said it was surprised by the variation of funding models for cluster hires and how little impact the models had on the ultimate success of the clusters. Those models fell into three main categories. In the centralized model, funding came from the research office and provost, and in the decentralized model, schools and colleges absorbed most of the cost.
Most institutions only began cluster hiring within the last eight years and had not yet developed comprehensive evaluations or metrics for the success of their programs. Developing evaluations not yet in place include such metrics as research dollars won and number of publications by cluster hires, number of new programs and research centers, and promotion and tenure rates.
Other kinds of diversity, such as ideology, were reported by the institutions that could measure them. At the University of Hawaii at Manoa, for example, five of seven of those hired into the sustainability cluster were women -- three of whom were native Hawaiian. One of those women was the first female native Hawaiian scholar ever to be hired in engineering at the university. At North Carolina State University, for example, the percentage of minority faculty members increased from 16 to 18 percent after cluster hiring, while Fresno State University observed a 2 percent increase in Hispanic faculty members and a 3 percent increase in female faculty.
Four out of 10 universities provided diversity training to search committees and three formed clusters around disciplines that tend to be diverse, such as Latin American studies or health equity. Other strategies included ensuring the search committee was diverse and pumping up overall recruitment efforts, such as advertising in new publications and offering dual-career hiring for academic couples. At all institutions in the study, cluster hiring had positive effects on at least one element of campus climate -- most commonly interdisciplinary collaboration.
The high percentage of non-tenure-track faculty in community colleges underscores the importance of enhancing conditions for faculty in these institutions for their own benefit as well as for that of the profession as a whole. The large number of community colleges is indicative of the diverse developments in contemporary American higher education. The range of institutions and the diversity of student needs have resulted in increasingly diverse kinds of faculty positions.
Higher education today includes community colleges which offer a mix of vocational training and transferable college credits; private liberal arts colleges; comprehensive colleges and state universities which may have several campuses offering different kinds of degree programs; and the fifty-eight Association of American Universities institutions which comprise the major research universities.
Within these institutions individual faculty members may combine teaching and research, do only one or the other, combine one or both with part-time administrative duties, staff clinics, libraries, or laboratories. Given the variety of needs and assignments, institutions should develop more than one model of the tenurable professor. Multiple models for faculty, developed around the kinds of work they do for their institutions, will better serve both the profession and the institutions.
The average of 38 percent of all faculty who are part time reaches 52 percent of the faculty in community colleges. Less than 5 percent of faculty who are part time are on the tenure track. Seventy-nine percent are classified below assistant professor, for example, instructor, lecturer, or reader. About 90 percent of all full-time lecturers and nearly 50 percent of all full-time instructors are non-tenure-track faculty.
Less than 20 percent of the total number of part-time faculty apparently seek full-time positions, though two-thirds of recent Ph.
Perhaps the key factor in the growth of part-time faculty is the economic advantage for institutions that pay them substantially less than the prorated equivalent paid for comparable work by full-time faculty. Non-tenure-track faculty are found among the lowest paid and lowest in total earnings of full-time faculty. On the average, part-time faculty members spent 6. Still, more than 62 percent of part-time faculty reported that their appointments did not last beyond the current term.
More than half 52 percent of part-time faculty had other full-time employment. Part-time faculty averaged fourteen hours per week for the academic institution but had a combined workload of forty-four hours from all jobs compared to fifty-three hours per week averaged by regular, full-time faculty. Although part-time faculty are employed at institutions of all types, the greater the emphasis the institution places on research, the smaller the percentage of part-time faculty it is likely to employ.
These figures conceal within them, however, the reliance of research institutions on graduate student assistants to teach introductory courses.
About 17 percent of the total faculty in the prestigious research universities are part-time faculty.
At doctoral and comprehensive universities combined, the percentage of part-time faculty goes up to At the two-year institutions, the percentage of part-time faculty reaches Public research universities employ proportionately fewer part-time faculty than private research universities, though the actual numbers are greater in the public than in the private universities, because the public universities are so much larger.
Of thefaculty members at public research universities, only These universities utilize graduate students as teachers, but the ratio of tenure-track to non-tenure-track faculty suggests that public research universities are more likely to have a stable faculty of full-time professors than are institutions in other categories. The distribution of full-time non-tenure-track appointments also varies significantly by type of institution.
Faculty Form Women in STEM Group
Private research and comprehensive universities lead with about 13 percent and 12 percent, respectively, in full-time positions classified as nontenure track or for which tenure is not available. Public doctoral and comprehensive universities are close behind with Liberal arts colleges, a category that includes most of the four-year institutions that lack tenure systems, have Almost 13 percent of liberal arts faculty are at institutions that do not have systems of tenure; 25 percent of the public two-year faculty and 71 percent of the relatively small number of private two-year faculty are at colleges that do not offer tenure.
Almost 90 percent of all faculty members are at institutions that have tenure policies. Almost all non-tenure-track faculty are in the lowest ranks. About 90 percent of all full-time lecturers and nearly 50 percent of all full-time instructors are nontenure track. Among part-time faculty, slightly more than half More than 27, part-time faculty members are employed at the senior ranks of associate or full professor, and almost 10 percent are full professors.
Meet the Team
Part-time faculty are disproportionately female. Although men are the majority of part-time faculty in all categories of institutions, women constitute about 42 percent of the part-time faculty compared to 27 percent of full-time faculty.
Viewed from another perspective, The number of male part-time faculty rose It is also disturbing to find that, although similar proportions of white and African-American faculty members are found at institutions without tenure systems 9. Degree status is an important factor in part-time employment. Overall, part-time faculty are much less likely than full-time faculty to hold doctoral degrees 29 percent vs.
In four-year institutions, 55 percent of part-time faculty hold a doctorate in comparison to 89 percent of the full-time faculty. Similarly, fewer than 25 percent of those faculty off the tenure track hold Ph. Doctoral or professional degrees are held by In public two-year institutions, fewer than 20 percent of either full- or part-time faculty have a doctorate or comparable professional degree. Full-time and tenure-track faculty are also substantially more likely to have published in the two years preceding the survey.
Some 21 percent of part-time faculty and 53 percent of full-time faculty reported publishing at least one refereed article, chapter, or book over the preceding two years.
The difference in expectations regarding publication and publication rates is substantial between research and doctoral institutions, where publication may be a professional expectation, and two-year colleges, where it may not be. Recent trends indicate that some tenure-track faculty are being moved to non-tenure-track positions. This shift is especially prevalent in medical colleges and other areas in which clinical and research faculty are employed.
Meet the Faculty: Honors: UNCW
The growth of outside grants to fund research has also produced an increasingly large number of faculty members whose appointments are tied to the duration of the grant and who are not eligible for tenure in their institutions. Appointing nonteaching clinical and research faculty to non-tenure-track positions is often justified by an institution on the grounds that nonclassroom personnel do not need academic freedom. Only researchers housed in universities but funded by outside agencies may fall outside the protections of tenure.
The growing trend to place research and clinical faculty of the institution on temporary contracts weakens academic freedom. The public suffers accordingly. Job security, benefits, and opportunity to advance are the three working conditions that most divide non-tenure-track faculty from their tenure-track colleagues. Fully half of the full-time non-tenure-track faculty expressed dissatisfaction with their job security, compared to 34 percent of tenure-track and 3. Satisfaction with job security fell to 43 percent for part-time faculty.
Almost 80 percent of part-time faculty were satisfied with their assigned workload in comparison to 73 percent of full-time faculty. Only 24 percent of part-time faculty were satisfied with their opportunities to advance as compared to 58 percent of full-time faculty. Women were less satisfied than men in all categories, and markedly more dissatisfied in their sense of the opportunity to advance 38 percent and 51 percent, respectively. Her study indicates that new Ph. Many institutions prorate benefits for faculty members who have, at least, half-time twenty hours appointments.
Forty-two percent of part-time faculty who worked more than twenty hours a week reported that the benefits surveyed were available to them, compared to only 11 percent of those who worked fewer than twenty hours a week. Only 16 percent of faculty members working more than twenty hours a week at two-year public institutions have access to medical insurance, and only 12 percent have access to life insurance.
Many non-tenure-track faculty members labor under conditions that hinder the professional quality of their work.