skip to main content


Title: Faculty Time Allocation at Historically Black Universities and Its Relationship to Institutional Expectations
University faculty divide their time into their main academic responsibilities, typically identified as teaching, research, service, and, at institutions with strong ties to their surrounding community, outreach. Most studies of time allocation have focused on faculty at Primarily White Institutions. The present study investigated how faculty at five Historically Black Universities (HBUs) allocate their time to their academic responsibilities. Data were analyzed based on their tenure status, gender, and representation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Faculty estimated the percentage of time they currently allocate ( current ), the time they would ideally allocate ( ideal ), and the time they estimate their institution expects them to allocate ( expected ) to each academic responsibility. Across all demographics, there were discrepancies between current and ideal time allocation to research and teaching and, in some demographics, outreach. The greatest discrepancy between current and expected time allocation was observed in time allocated to research, with women and untenured faculty also showing a discrepancy in time allocated to teaching, and underrepresented faculty showing no discrepancies between current and expected time allocation. Women, untenured, and underrepresented faculty reported that their time allocation patterns were guided by external factors rather than personal preferences. The surveyed faculty also stated that the patterns of effort distribution expected to obtain tenure were not necessarily guided by the faculty handbooks at their institution. Although this study is limited by its relatively small sample size, it provides an insight into how faculty at HBUs divide their time and the reasons for them to do so.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1820961 1820981
NSF-PAR ID:
10337575
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Frontiers in Psychology
Volume:
12
ISSN:
1664-1078
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. Improving undergraduate STEM teaching for diverse students is dependent to some extent on increasing the representation of Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) and women in the ranks of faculty in engineering departments. However, new faculty members, whether they had postdoctoral training or not, report that they were not adequately prepared for academia. To address this need, a professional development program was developed for underrepresented doctoral and postdoctoral students, which focused on various strategies to be successful in teaching, research and service aspects of academic positions. The program included an intensive two-week summer session, with follow-up mentoring during the academic year, and was conducted from 2017 to 2020 with three cohorts of fellows recruited from across the country. To evaluate the impact of the program on the participants’ perceptions of their preparation for academic careers, a follow up survey was sent in May 2021 to the three former cohorts of participants (n=61), and responses were received from 37 of them. The survey asked participants to reflect on areas that they felt most prepared for in their academic positions, and areas that they felt least prepared for. The survey also asked participants to discuss additional supports they would have liked to have been provided with to better prepare them given their current positions (academic, industry, etc.). Results from the survey indicated that 92% of participants found the professional development program prepared them for the responsibilities and expectations to succeed in academic positions. Over 90% agreed that the program prepared them for the application process for a tenure track search, and 89% agreed the program prepared them for the primary components of the startup package. In addition, participants reported that the program increased their preparation in developing teaching philosophy (100%), developing learning outcomes (97%), and using active learning strategies during teaching (91%). The majority agreed that the program helped prepare them to teach students with various cultural backgrounds, and to develop and use assessment strategies. Participants were also asked to discuss the impact of the Covid 19 pandemic on their career trajectory, and most of them reported being somewhat impacted (65%) to extremely impacted (29%). Participants reported few or no job openings, cancelations of interviews, delays in research which impacted the rate of completing degrees, and publications, which affected the participants’ application competitiveness. Furthermore, working from home and balancing family and academic responsibilities affected their productivity. Based on the survey results, funds were secured to provide an additional day of professional training to cover any items not addressed during summer training, as well as any issues, challenges, or concerns they might have encountered while fulfilling their academic position. Thirty-three ACADEME fellows have indicated that they will participate in the new professional development, held in May 2022. Results from this analysis, and preliminary topics and outcomes of the supplemental activities are discussed. The findings contribute to the literature by increasing knowledge of specific challenges that new faculty encounter and can inform future efforts to support minorities and women in engineering doctoral programs. 
    more » « less
  2. Improving undergraduate STEM teaching for diverse students is dependent to some extent on increasing the representation of Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC) and women in the ranks of faculty in engineering departments. However, new faculty members, whether they had postdoctoral training or not, report that they were not adequately prepared for academia. To address this need, a professional development program was developed for underrepresented doctoral and postdoctoral students, which focused on various strategies to be successful in teaching, research and service aspects of academic positions. The program included an intensive two-week summer session, with follow-up mentoring during the academic year, and was conducted from 2017 to 2020 with three cohorts of fellows recruited from across the country. To evaluate the impact of the program on the participants’ perceptions of their preparation for academic careers, a follow up survey was sent in May 2021 to the three former cohorts of participants (n=61), and responses were received from 37 of them. The survey asked participants to reflect on areas that they felt most prepared for in their academic positions, and areas that they felt least prepared for. The survey also asked participants to discuss additional supports they would have liked to have been provided with to better prepare them given their current positions (academic, industry, etc.). Results from the survey indicated that 92% of participants found the professional development program prepared them for the responsibilities and expectations to succeed in academic positions. Over 90% agreed that the program prepared them for the application process for a tenure track search, and 89% agreed the program prepared them for the primary components of the startup package. In addition, participants reported that the program increased their preparation in developing teaching philosophy (100%), developing learning outcomes (97%), and using active learning strategies during teaching (91%). The majority agreed that the program helped prepare them to teach students with various cultural backgrounds, and to develop and use assessment strategies. Participants were also asked to discuss the impact of the Covid 19 pandemic on their career trajectory, and most of them reported being somewhat impacted (65%) to extremely impacted (29%). Participants reported few or no job openings, cancelations of interviews, delays in research which impacted the rate of completing degrees, and publications, which affected the participants’ application competitiveness. Furthermore, working from home and balancing family and academic responsibilities affected their productivity. Based on the survey results, funds were secured to provide an additional day of professional training to cover any items not addressed during summer training, as well as any issues, challenges, or concerns they might have encountered while fulfilling their academic position. Thirty-three ACADEME fellows have indicated that they will participate in the new professional development, held in May 2022. Results from this analysis, and preliminary topics and outcomes of the supplemental activities are discussed. The findings contribute to the literature by increasing knowledge of specific challenges that new faculty encounter and can inform future efforts to support minorities and women in engineering doctoral programs. 
    more » « less
  3. Despite efforts over the past few decades to promote diversity and foster inclusive campus climates, there is still underrepresentation of Blacks/ African Americans, Latinx/Hispanics, and Native Americans (including Native Hawaiians and Alaska Natives) within the STEM professoriate nationwide. For students who are members of these groups, the culturally isolating experience this deficit creates can weaken one's academic self-perception, and hinder performance in STEM disciplines. This paper explores the relationship between intentionality towards diversity and inclusion in faculty job postings and corresponding faculty demographics at a variety of US postsecondary institutions. The research questions we are investigating are: •In what ways are diversity and inclusion implicitly and explicitly addressed in the evaluated job postings? •Does intentionality towards diversity and inclusion in job postings vary based on the type of position advertised (i.e., tenured/tenure track versus non-tenure-track) or institution type (i.e., Basic Carnegie Classification)? Using HigherEdJobs.com, we conducted an advanced search of all open science and engineering faculty positions containing the keywords "data science", "data engineering", "data analysis", or "data analytics." Each result posted in September 2019 that advertised a full-time tenured/tenure-track or non-tenure track faculty appointment for at least one academic year at a US college or university was recorded. All qualifying job postings were qualitatively analyzed for active, intentional recruitment of URM candidates. Intentionality towards diversity and inclusion varied significantly across job postings. While some had no reference to diversity beyond a required one-sentence equal employment opportunity (EEO) statement, others explicitly addressed inclusion within the announcements, and still others required a standalone diversity statement as part of a complete application. The results will help to inform strategies for recruiting URM faculty in STEM disciplines, which may lead to improved opportunities to create cultures of inclusion and support for diverse students (undergraduate and graduate) and postdoctoral fellows. 
    more » « less
  4. Foundational engineering courses are critical to student success in engineering programs. The conceptually challenging content of these courses establishes the requisite knowledge for future classes. Thus, it is no surprise that such courses can serve as barriers or gatekeepers to successful student progress through the undergraduate curriculum. Although the difficulty of the courses may be necessary, often other features of the course delivery such as large class environments or a few very high-stakes assessments can further exacerbate these challenges. And especially problematic, past studies have shown that grade penalties associated with these courses and environments may disproportionately impact women. On the faculty side, institutions often turn to non-tenure track instructional faculty to teach multiple sections of foundational courses each semester. Although having faculty whose sole role is dedicated to quality teaching is an asset, benefits would likely be maximized when such faculty have clear metrics for paths to promotion, some autonomy and ownership regarding the curriculum, and overall job satisfaction. However, literature suggests that faculty, like students, note ill effects from large classes, such as challenges connecting and building rapport with students and having time to offer individualized feedback to students. Our NSF IUSE project focuses on instructors of large foundational engineering students with the belief that by better understanding the educational environment from their perspective we can improve the quality of the teaching and learning environment for all engineering students. Our project regularly convenes faculty teaching an array of core courses (e.g,. Mathematics, Chemistry, Mechanics, Physics) and uses insights from these meetings and individual interviews to identify possible leverage points where our project or the institution more broadly might affect change. Parallel to this effort, we have been working with data stewards on campus to gain access to institutional data (e.g., student course and grade histories, student evaluations of faculty teaching) to link and provide aggregate deidentified results to faculty to feed more information in to their decision-making. We are demonstrating that regular engagement between faculty and institutional leaders around analyzed and curated data is essential to continuous and systematic improvement. Efforts to date have included building an institutional data explorer dashboard (e.g., influences of pre-requisite courses on future courses) and drafting reports to be sent to department heads and associate deans which gather priorities identified in the first year of our research. For example, participating instructors identified that clarity of promotion paths across non-tenure track teaching faculty from different departments varied greatly, and the institution as a whole could benefit from clarified university-wide guidance. While some findings may be institution-specific (NSF IUSE Institutional Transformation track), as a large public research institution, peer-institutions with high engineering enrollments often face similar challenges and so findings from our change efforts potentially have broad applicability. 
    more » « less
  5. CONTEXT Engineering education is an interdisciplinary research field where scholars are commonly embedded within the context they study. Engineering Education Scholars (EES), individuals who define themselves by having expertise associated with both engineering education research and practice, inhabit an array of academic positions, depending on their priorities, interests, and desired impact. These positions include, but are not limited to, traditional tenure-track faculty positions, professional teaching or research positions, and positions within teaching and learning centers or other centers. EES also work in diverse institutional contexts, including engineering disciplinary departments, first-year programs, and engineering education departments, which further vary their roles. PURPOSE OR GOAL The purpose of this preliminary research study is to better understand the roles and responsibilities of early-career EES. This knowledge will enable PhD programs to better prepare engineering education graduates to more intentionally seek positions, which is especially important given the growing number of engineering education PhD programs. We address our purpose by exploring the following research question: How can we describe the diversity of academic or faculty roles early-career EES undertake? APPROACH OR METHODOLOGY/METHODS We implemented an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study starting with a survey (n=59) to better understand the strategic actions of United States-based early-career EES. We used a clustering technique to identify clusters of participants based on these actions (e.g., teaching focused priorities, research goals). We subsequently recruited 14 survey participants, representing each of the main clusters, to participate in semi-structured interviews. Through the interviews, we sought to gain a more nuanced understanding of each participant’s actions in the contexts of their roles and responsibilities. We analyzed each interview transcript to develop memos providing an overview of each early-career EES role description and then used a cross case analysis where the unit of analysis was a cluster. ACTUAL OUTCOMES Five main clusters were identified through our analysis, with three representing primarily research-focused day-to-day responsibilities and two representing primarily teaching-focused day-to-day responsibilities. The difference between the clusters was influenced by the institutional context and the areas in which EES selected to focus their roles and responsibilities. These results add to our understanding of how early-career EES enact their roles within different institutional contexts and positions. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS/SUMMARY This work can be used by graduate programs around the world to better prepare their engineering education graduates for obtaining positions that align with their goals and interests. Further, we expect this work to provide insight to institutions so that they can provide the support and resources to enable EES to reach their desired impact within their positions. 
    more » « less