Search for: All records

Research-intensive universities aim to conduct cutting-edge research while providing the knowledge and skills necessary to prepare students to excel in their respective fields. As student enrollments surge, many institutions have turned to hiring teaching-focused faculty. In the University of California (UC) system, there exists a unique position known as the Professor of Teaching (PoT). This position is tenure-eligible, and members are required to engage in classroom teaching, scholarly activities, and service responsibilities. To shed light on the background characteristics, roles and perceptions of the impact of teaching-focused faculty in research-intensive institutions, we collected survey data from STEM PoT faculty across the UC system. We employed a mixed methods approach, using descriptive and inferential statistics to analyze quantitative responses and thematic analysis to examine open-ended qualitative data. Our analysis shows that pre-tenure PoTs place greater emphasis on scholarly activities relative to their peers who have been in the role for longer. However, their training and the institutional resources provided may not align with expectations for scholarly activities. Additionally, we find that PoTs who engage in research perceive that they have a more significant impact on their colleagues’ teaching. This finding underscores the value of research, even for teaching-focused faculty. This study informs the evolving landscape of teaching-focused faculty within research-intensive universities and provides recommendations for administrators considering how to ensure that their institutions are fulfilling their educational mission. 

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted scientific research, teaching, and learning in higher education and forced many institutions to explore new modalities in response to the abrupt shift to remote learning. Accordingly, many colleges and universities struggled to provide the training, technology, and best practices to support faculty and students, especially those at historically disadvantaged and underrepresented institutions. In this study we investigate different remote learning modalities to improve and enhance research education training for faculty and students. We specifically focus on Responsible and Ethical Conduct of Research (RECR) and research mentoring content to help address the newly established requirements of the National Science Foundation for investigators. To address this need we conducted a workshop to determine the effectiveness of three common research education modalities: Live Lecture, Podcast, and Reading. The Live Lecture sessions provided the most evidence of learning based on the comparison between pre- and post-test results, whereas the Podcast format was well received but produced a slight (and non-significant) decline in scores between the pre- and post-tests. The Reading format showed no significant improvement in learning. The results of our workshop illuminate the effectiveness and obstacles associated with various remote learning modalities, enabling us to pinpoint areas that require additional refinement and effort, including the addition of interactive media in Reading materials. 

Organizational climate is a key determinant of diverse aspects of success in work settings, including in academia. Power dynamics in higher education can result in inequitable experiences of workplace climate, potentially harming the well-being and productivity of employees. Quantifying experiences of climate across employment categories can help identify changes necessary to create a more equitable workplace for all. We developed and administered a climate survey within our academic workplace—the Department of Zoology and Physiology at the University of Wyoming—to evaluate experiences of climate across three employment categories: faculty, graduate students, and staff. Our survey included a combination of closed-response (e.g., Likert-scale) and open-ended questions. Most department members (82%) completed the survey, which was administered in fall 2021. Faculty generally reported more positive experiences than staff. Graduate students often fell between these two groups, though in some survey sections (e.g., mental health and well-being) students reported the most negative experiences of departmental climate. Three common themes emerged from the analysis of open-ended responses: equity, community, and accountability. We discuss how these themes correspond to concrete action items for improving our departmental climate, some of which have been implemented already, while others constitute future initiatives and/or require a collective push towards systemic change in academia. Finally, service work of this type often falls outside of job descriptions, requiring individuals to either work more or trade-off productivity in other areas that are formally evaluated. With the goal of minimizing this burden for others, we detail our process and provide the materials and framework necessary to streamline this process for other departments aiming to evaluate workplace climate as a key first step in building a positive work environment for all employees.