Search results

This chapter examines staffing trends for Beta Alpha Psi (BAP) advisors over the past 20 years to document the degree of tenure- versus nontenure-track faculty involvement. We surveyed faculty advisors to determine how they are compensated for their BAP service. Our findings show a significant increase in the percentage of nontenure-track faculty filling the role of BAP advisor. Additionally, few advisors appear to receive pecuniary benefits for their service, and nearly one-third receive no reimbursement from their institutions for BAP-related expenses that they incur. We discuss the implications of these findings and their potential for limiting BAP's ability to execute future strategic initiatives.

Mentoring postdocs is a shared responsibility and dynamic process that requires a mutual commitment between the faculty mentor and postdoc. The purpose of this study is to understand how minoritized science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) postdocs view and engage in mentoring exchanges with their faculty mentors. In the context of this study, minoritized postdocs include women, people of color, and individuals with international status; faculty mentors include postdocs’ Principal Investigators (PIs).

Three researchers and 31 data sources (i.e., interview transcripts) were used to construct the case. Researchers first deductively and independently coded the data sources using Molm’s (2006) social exchange framework to identify examples of direct, generalized, and productive mentoring exchanges. Researchers then used thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2006) to identify emergent themes among coded examples of direct, generalized, and productive mentoring exchanges.

Data analyses revealed three emergent themes: (1.1) postdocs valued regular meetings and communication with mentors to clarify responsibilities and role expectations, (1.2) postdocs found more value in their interactions with junior faculty PIs who were flexible and open to innovative ideas, and (1.3) postdocs appreciated conversations about short- and long-term career goals and advice with mentors.

Findings offer implications for faculty and postdocs’ approaches to mentoring relationships, and for approaches to cultivating supportive scholarly communities in STEM higher education. Recommendations include flexibility in research assignments, increased awareness of non-academic careers, and opportunities for informal interactions and intra/interdepartmental community building.

The purpose of this duoethnography was to share our narratives as a left-behind early career faculty (ECF) and graduate student with minoritized identities and reflect on academic socialization processes. Specifically, when many scholars are raising alarms about the retention and success of faculty with minoritized identities, it is crucial to recognize the dimensions of socialization within the organizational context of academia.

The authors sought an approach that would facilitate the interrogation of the overlap and divergence of the authors’ perspectives. Duoethnography research design was chosen for its focus on self-reflection as well as on the importance of the expression and consideration of those diverging perspectives. The goal was collaboration to generate a discussion that deepens a complex understanding of socialization in and professional commitment to academia.

The central insight that surfaced from the analysis of our duoethnography data is the enhanced understanding of the “nameless-faceless” dimension of academic socialization. Endeavoring to understand why faculty leave and how those who are left behind make sense of that departure led the authors to examine the unknown entities the authors are responsible to and for so they may better understand their commitment to academia.

The authors’ findings reveal that the nameless–faceless element is just a generalized behavior adopted in the interest of restricted and individual advantage. Diversity and equity practices are touted as a priority, but frequently, institutions act in ways that establish their own self-interests. The authors argue that we are all the nameless–faceless when they participate in academic norms that work to uphold and perpetuate traditional practices in academia.

The authors’ findings point to intentional mentoring and integration of responsibility in faculty roles as potential recruitment and retention tools.

The authors extend the importance of collaboration and mentorship in retaining graduate students and EFC to the concept of intertwined professional commitment, or the theory that it is not simply the outcomes that are influenced by the support and cooperation between faculty with minoritized identities but that our professional commitment to academia is strengthened by that collaboration and witnessing each other's purpose and motivation to remain in academia.

The main purpose of this study was to examine which job resources are most valuable for research productivity, depending on varying teaching demands.

Data was collected from 324 management faculty at research, balanced and teaching (i.e. respectively low-, moderate- and high-teaching demands) public universities in the United States.

Results showed that no single job resource predicted research productivity across all three types of schools. At research schools (i.e. low-teaching demands), productivity was positively associated with job resources including summer compensation, level of protection for untenured faculty and number of research assistant hours, while negatively associated with travel funding. At balanced schools (i.e. moderate-teaching demands), research output was positively associated with time allocated to research, grant money, travel funding and conference attendance, while negatively associated with amount of consulting hours. At teaching schools (i.e. high-teaching demands), the only significant resource was time allocated to research.

This paper can help management faculty and business school leaders understand what resources are most appropriate given the teaching demands associated with the specific institution, and by further helping these institutions attract and retain the best possible faculty.

This study extends prior work on academic research performance by identifying resources that can help faculty publish given different levels of teaching demands. This is important as teaching demands tend to be relatively stable within an institution, while they can vary greatly across types of institutions.

Increased student diversity in universities across the USA has increased the need for post-secondary educators to develop multicultural teaching competence (MTC). Most studies of MTC focus on educators teaching grades K-12. The purpose of this study is to determine how faculty members rate themselves in terms of MTC, what multicultural knowledge and skills faculty report and how they integrate these skills into their teaching practice and what barriers exist to developing and implementing MTC. The purpose of this study was to examine the factors that impact undergraduate faculty integration of multicultural awareness and attitudes into their teaching practices to enhance student learning.

A convergent mixed methods study used survey and interview data from undergraduate faculty. Select items from the MTC Inventory (MTCI) and social justice scales (SJS) were administered. Interviews (N = 7) were transcribed and analyzed using thematic analysis. Quantitative and qualitative data were compared to examine convergence and divergence.

Quantitative results revealed undergraduate faculty’s awareness, knowledge and skills as indicated by percent agreement with items from the MTCI and SJS instruments. Qualitative findings included the following four themes: knowledge building, addressing diversity in the classroom, barriers and challenges, and needs and recommendations. Qualitative data corroborated or explained many of the quantitative results and provided insight into these trends and barriers that impact MTC.

This is the first study of its kind, to our knowledge, that has used a mixed methods research design to examine factors that impact MTCs and associated barriers among a sample of undergraduate faculty across disciplines in one urban university.

The purpose of this paper is to determine which software systems business school administrators use to support accreditation efforts and how administrators select and use these systems. This study also provides best practice suggestions from institutions using faculty data management systems to support accreditation efforts.

This study used a sequential explanatory design using an internet-based survey for business school administrators involved with accreditation reporting with follow-up interviews with survey respondents.

There are four major software vendors that most respondents use for managing reporting of faculty research activity and sufficiency. The location of the school appears to influence the system selected. For assurance of learning reporting, most schools used an in-house or manual system. Respondents highlighted the importance of doing a thorough needs analysis before selecting a system.

Although respondents were geographically diverse, having a larger sample with schools in developing regions would provide greater generalizability of results.

This study gives business school leaders a comprehensive overview of the business schools’ data management systems, criteria used in system selection and best practices for system selection and implementation, faculty engagement and ongoing maintenance.

This study addresses the limited attention given to resources and best practices for selecting and implementing faculty data management software for accreditation in the academic and industry literature despite the significant investment of resources for schools and the importance such systems play in a successful accreditation effort.

Despite the potential for research institutes to advance interdisciplinary research on university campuses, There have been few studies on how interdisciplinary research centres integrate multiple disciplines in practice, how they influence the collaborative behaviours of scientists and how they establish collaborative communities. This study aims to provide a deeper understanding of how interdisciplinary research is being enabled at research institutes and offers signposts for how research institutes can further embed interdisciplinarity within their units.

Within this study, 30 interviews were conducted with leadership and faculty within 4 sustainability research institutes in the USA exploring how research institutes support interdisciplinary research within their units. A thematic analysis on the interview data revealed themes on how research institutes are enabling interdisciplinary research within their organisations and universities.

The study highlights eight themes on how research institutes are, and can further, enable interdisciplinary research within their organisations and universities. Some of the themes are fully implemented within the research institutes, whilst others are more aspirational and highlight where institutes can create additional capability and capacity for interdisciplinary research within their units and universities.

Whilst the study is limited to four major sustainability research institutes the findings will be applicable to all research centres and institutes attempting to create interdisciplinary research environments.

The study will be of particular interest to research institutes and university leadership who wish to cultivate a deeper culture of interdisciplinary research within their organisations.

The advancement of inter- and transdisciplinary research within universities are seen by many academic institutions, expert groups and funding bodies as essential for solving wicked problems and grand challenges facing society. The findings of this paper will help universities increase their capacity for interdisciplinary research.

There are few comparable publications in terms of methodology, approach and focus on research institutes.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and assess a faculty development program targeted at pedagogically sound integration of technology by faculty into their courses.

The paper developed a program that combines a summer training institute and a yearlong faculty learning community. This program is supported by instructional technology and faculty development experts, and rewards the participants both with a stipend and with acknowledgement. To assess the effectiveness of this program, the paper used electronic anonymous surveys during the middle and end of the program.

Self-reported evaluations suggests that the alumni of the 2011-2012 cohort will continue to develop and adapt technologies in their course, and would encourage their colleagues to do the same. In addition, the majority report that the program has changed the way they see and use technology in the classroom. Additional observations about the program alumni's involvement in continuing efforts to improve teaching with technology indicate that this program may be having an effect beyond the individual participants.

Assessment of the program was limited to only one year, and needs to continue to evaluate the program and the faculty after they leave the program.

This program provides a possible model to implement change at a university, on teaching with technology, or other teaching- and learning-related topics.

In a world where there are increasing expectations of technology in teaching, a successful model of faculty development which produces an increase in pedagogically sound faculty adoption of teaching technology is a valuable one to higher education.

To provide insight into the relevant factors for faculty recruitment and retention that can help leadership of business schools to design and implement a tailored policy to recruit and retain academic talent in a highly competitive and international market.

Two surveys were sent out in parallel to deans/directors and faculty of 181 European business schools. A total of 42 important factors were selected and ranked in order of importance for both recruitment and retention of academic talent. In addition the faculty were asked to indicate to what extent they are satisfied with each of the factors in their current situation. Deans/directors were asked to indicate to what extent they felt able to influence each of the factors.

Factors of crucial importance for recruitment and retention were identified, both from the deans and from the faculty perspective. Perception gaps occurred between deans and faculty, as well as satisfaction gaps on important factors: this led to the identification of interesting policy problems and opportunities. Segmentation of the sample facilitated the demonstration of differences in perception between groups of faculty according to gender, age and rank, and between groups of schools according to legal structure, orientation, enrolment, and accreditation status.

Deans/directors of 69 European schools and 350 faculty members in 12 countries completed the survey. The database could be further enlarged to make more detailed analysis possible. Expanding the research to include schools of other continents would enable one to analyse cross‐continent differences between business schools.

The developed framework and the data provide an excellent opportunity for business schools' leadership to analyze the effectiveness of its policy and benchmark the school against a selected peer group.

The survey and the developed framework for analysis are unique and, in this form, have never been done before. The value of the paper is that it presents unique evidence on important factors crucial to faculty management.

The purpose of this study was to determine faculty preferences and attitudes regarding reference management software (RMS) to improve the library’s support and training programs.

A short, online survey was emailed to approximately 272 faculty.

Survey results indicated that multiple RMS were in use, with faculty preferring Zotero over the library-supported RefWorks. More than 40 per cent did not use any RMS.

The relatively short length of the survey precluded a more detailed investigation of faculty attitudes. The 20 per cent response rate, although typical of surveys of this type, may over-represent those faculty who have strong attitudes toward RMS. These findings support the necessity of doing more research to establish the parameters of the RMS environment among faculty, with implications for support, instruction and outreach at the institutional level.

Surveys should be conducted to establish local faculty RMS usage and preferences, as they may differ from both published findings and local expectations. Because it is unlikely that faculty will overwhelmingly use one RMS, libraries should plan to support multiple RMS.

This study is among the first to investigate the issue of RMS faculty preferences in a liberal arts setting.