2014 Report on the University at Albany Faculty and Professional Staff Survey on Shared

2014 Report on the University at Albany Faculty and Professional Staff Survey on Shared Governance

2014 REPORT ON THE UNIVERSITY AT ALBANY FACULTY AND PROFESSIONAL STAFF SURVEY ON SHARED GOVERNANCE

Table of Contents

2014 REPORT ON THE UNIVERSITY AT ALBANY FACULTY AND PROFESSIONAL STAFF SURVEY ON SHARED GOVERNANCE 1

2014 REPORT ON THE UNIVERSITY AT ALBANY FACULTY AND PROFESSIONAL STAFF SURVEY ON SHARED GOVERNANCE 3

Introduction 3

Summary of Overall Faculty and Professional Staff Descriptors 3

Familiarity with Senate Councils or Committees 7

Which Senate Councils or Committees Function Effectively? 7

University at Albany’s Climate for Governance 8

Effective Consultation 10

Search Processes and Procedures 11

Role of Administration and Faculty 11

Awareness of Individual Responsibility and Engagement in Shared Governance 12

The University Senate 14

Representation of Student Issues 15

Qualitative Analysis of Question 12 16

Results 16

Major Themes 17

THEME 1: UNIVERSITY AT ALBANY FACULTY AND STAFF PERCEIVE THE SENATE AS INEFFECTIVE 17

Perception 1: The Senate Serves the Administration 18

Perception 2: Lack of Respect Amongst Constituents 19

Perception 3: Lack of Transparency 20

Perception 4: Administrators Should Not Serve on Senate Councils 20

THEME 2: FACULTY AND PROFESSIONAL STAFF EXPRESS DISTRUST 21

Perception 1: Faculty and Professional Staff Express Distrust of the Administration 21

Perception 2: Faculty and Professional Staff Express Distrust of Senate Leaders 22

Perception 3: Faculty and Professional Staff Express Misgivings Regarding Program Deactivations in 2010 22

Perception 4: Administration Views Faculty as Not Respecting Administration 23

Perception 5: Sense of Fear and Hopelessness 23

THEME 3: Faculty and Professional Staff Provide Recommendations for Improvement 24

Recommendation 1: Need for More Information 24

Recommendation 2: Call to Focus on Curriculum Content 25

Recommendation 3: Call for Continuity in Representation 25

Recommendation 4: Improve Shared Governance 26

Recommendation 5: Improve the University at Albany Faculty and Professional Staff Survey on Shared Governance 26

Recommendation 6: Relocate/Rotate Council and Senate Meetings 26

SUMMARY AND NEXT STEPS 27

Work Cited 28

Table 1: Number of Respondents by Classification 3

Table 2: Full or Part Time Status 4

Table 3: Time at the University 4

Table 4: Familiarity with Senate and Councils 5

Table 5: Service as Senator 5

Table 6: Service on Senate Committee or Council 5

Table 7: Familiarity with Councils and Committees 6

Table 8: Which Senate Councils or Committees Function Effectively? 7

Table 9: University at Albany’s Climate for Governance 8

Table 10: Effective Consultation 9

Table 11: Search Processes and Procedures 10

Table 12: Role of Administration and Faculty 11

Table 13: Awareness of Individual Responsibility and Engagement 12

Table 14: Code Count 16

Table 15: Reasons faculty and professional staff view the Senate as ineffective 17

Table 16: Faculty and Professional Staff Perceptions of Distrust 20

Table 17: Faculty and Professional Staff Recommendations for Improvement 23

2014 REPORT ON THE UNIVERSITY AT ALBANY FACULTY AND PROFESSIONAL STAFF SURVEY ON SHARED GOVERNANCE

Introduction

In the fall of 2013 the Committee on Assessment of Governance and Consultation, a standing committee of the Senate Governance Council, developed two surveys, one for faculty and professional staff and the other for students (undergraduate and graduate), to evaluate the effectiveness of governance in representing its constituencies, in addressing issues and concerns, and in affecting institutional decisions. Although the Committee is charged, as written in the Charter of the University Senate, section X.1.3, to “develop and regularly administer assessment instruments, conduct data analysis and report findings to the Council,” the last time the university community had been polled regarding such issues had been a 2009 survey for the Middle States Self-Study.[i]

The survey instruments were based on the American Association of University Professor’s (AAUP) Evaluation of Shared Governance Survey, a list of questions designed to allow for the immediate evaluation of the state of shared government at institutions of higher education.[ii] In adapting the AAUP Survey, the Committee also solicited feedback from the Governance Council as a whole and from the Office of the President. It was very much a collaborative effort to determine how best to support and strengthen shared governance at the University at Albany.

The surveys were administered in the spring of 2014. While the combined results clearly suggest that the university community is generally uninformed about governance, readers should keep in mind that specific themes, comments, or particular percentages may not at this point be taken as representative. The Governance Council also recognizes weaknesses in the survey instrument that need to be addressed before the survey is repeated in the spring of 2016. Nevertheless, the Council believes that this study is a “revelatory case,” what Yin (1984, p. 43) describes as an opportunity to observe and analyze an understudied phenomenon: how university constituents perceive the effectiveness of university governance bodies.

For these reasons, this report should be understood as the beginning of a long-term project: a concerted and consistent effort to inform the University community about governance andto inform the University Senate about the "state of governance" in the larger university community it serves.

Summary of Overall Faculty and Professional Staff Descriptors

A total of n= 311 (12.4%) faculty and staff responded to the University at Albany Faculty & Professional Staff Survey on Shared Governance (N=2,500). Faculty and professional staff were first offered the survey on May 1st, 2014, and the last respondent completed the survey on May 20th, 2014. Respondents spent an average of 14:46 minutes to complete the survey. The number of respondents by classification is presented in Table 1 below.

Table 1: Number of Respondents by Classification

Classification /
/ Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative Percent /
Valid / Teaching / 147 / 47.3 / 47.3 / 47.3 /
Professional / 135 / 43.4 / 43.4 / 90.7 /
Librarian / 11 / 3.5 / 3.5 / 94.2 /
Management/Confidential / 18 / 5.8 / 5.8 / 100.0 /
Total / 311 / 100.0 / 100.0

Of the 311 respondents 276 (88.7%) were fulltime and 35 (11.3%) were part time, see Table 2:

Table 2: Full or Part Time Status

Full/Part /
/ Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative Percent /
Valid / Full-Time / 276 / 88.7 / 88.7 / 88.7 /
Part-Time / 35 / 11.3 / 11.3 / 100.0 /
Total / 311 / 100.0 / 100.0

More than 40% of respondents have worked at the university between 5 and 14 years or more, 37% have worked at the university for more than 15 years. Only 21% of the respondents have worked at the university less than 4 years (see Table 3 below).

Table 3: Time at the University

How long have you worked at UAlbany? /
/ Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative Percent /
Valid / Less than 1 year / 17 / 5.5 / 5.5 / 5.5 /
1-2 years / 28 / 9.0 / 9.0 / 14.5 /
3-4 years / 19 / 6.1 / 6.1 / 20.6 /
5-9 years / 72 / 23.2 / 23.2 / 43.7 /
10-14 years / 60 / 19.3 / 19.3 / 63.0 /
15-19 years / 38 / 12.2 / 12.2 / 75.2 /
20-29 years / 45 / 14.5 / 14.5 / 89.7 /
30 or more years / 32 / 10.3 / 10.3 / 100.0 /
Total / 311 / 100.0 / 100.0

More than fifty percent of respondents are Somewhat Familiar with the University at Albany’s Senate and Councils, and almost 22% of respondents reported being Very Familiar. Twenty-four percent of respondents reported being Not at all Familiar with the Senate and its Councils.

Table 4: Familiarity with Senate and Councils

How familiar are you with the University at Albany’s Senate and its councils? /
/ Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative Percent /
Valid / Not at all Familiar / 74 / 23.8 / 23.9 / 23.9 /
Somewhat Familiar / 168 / 54.0 / 54.4 / 78.3 /
Very Familiar / 67 / 21.5 / 21.7 / 100.0 /
Total / 309 / 99.4 / 100.0 /
Missing / System / 2 / .6 /
Total / 311 / 100.0

Only 22% of respondents have served as Senator, see Table 5 below:

Table 5: Service as Senator

I have served as Senator. /
/ Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative Percent /
Valid / Not Checked / 243 / 78.1 / 78.1 / 78.1 /
I have served as Senator. / 68 / 21.9 / 21.9 / 100.0 /
Total / 311 / 100.0 / 100.0

40% of respondents have served on a Senate Committee or Council (see Table 6).

Table 6: Service on Senate Committee or Council

I have served on a Senate committee or council. /
/ Frequency / Percent / Valid Percent / Cumulative Percent /
Valid / Not Checked / 187 / 60.1 / 60.1 / 60.1 /
I have served on a Senate committee or council. / 124 / 39.9 / 39.9 / 100.0 /
Total / 311 / 100.0 / 100.0

Familiarity with Senate Councils or Committees

With the exception of exception of the Council on Libraries, Information Systems & Computing (LISC), and University Life Council (ULC) each of the Senate’s Councils and Committees was familiar to +/-50% respondents. The data for all Councils and Committees is presented in Table 7.

Table 7: Familiarity with Councils and Committees

Familiarity with Senate Councils and/or Committees
Have NOT Heard / Have Heard / Have Interacted / Have Served
Frequency / Percentage / Frequency / Percentage / Frequency / Percentage / Frequency / Percentage
CAA / 93 / 32 / 146 / 51 / 34 / 12 / 21 / 7
CAFFECoR / 121 / 42 / 139 / 48 / 18 / 6 / 18 / 6
CERS / 116 / 40 / 153 / 53 / 13 / 5 / 10 / 3
COR / 87 / 30 / 156 / 54 / 32 / 11 / 30 / 10
CPCA / 58 / 20 / 149 / 50 / 69 / 23 / 35 / 12
GAC / 83 / 29 / 141 / 49 / 55 / 19 / 25 / 9
GOV / 93 / 32 / 154 / 54 / 26 / 9 / 24 / 8
LISC / 115 / 40 / 125 / 43 / 26 / 9 / 33 / 11
UAC / 74 / 25 / 151 / 51 / 40 / 14 / 47 / 16
ULC / 111 / 38 / 128 / 44 / 30 / 10 / 30 / 10
UPPC / 97 / 34 / 142 / 49 / 40 / 14 / 23 / 8

Which Senate Councils or Committees Function Effectively?

When asked which of the following Senate Councils or Committees faculty and professional staff perceived as functioning effectively, the vast majority of the respondents (70-88%) replied I Don't Know. Respondents who were aware of the functioning of a Senate Council were generally (at least 2:1, in most cases higher) of the opinion that the Council was functioning effectively, except for CAFFECoR. For CAFFECoR, of the respondents familiar with its functioning, a majority were of the opinion that it was not functioning effectively. (See Table 8)

Table 8: Which Senate Councils or Committees Function Effectively?

Which of the Senate Councils or Committees are Functioning Effectively
Functioning Effectively / NOT Functioning Effectively / I Don't Know
Frequency / Percentage / Frequency / Percentage / Frequency / Percentage
CAA / 35 / 12 / 17 / 6 / 243 / 82
CAFFECoR / 17 / 6 / 27 / 9 / 249 / 85
CERS / 25 / 8 / 9 / 3 / 261 / 88
COR / 38 / 13 / 17 / 6 / 238 / 81
CPCA / 80 / 27 / 26 / 9 / 213 / 65
GAC / 67 / 23 / 13 / 4 / 216 / 73
GOV / 37 / 13 / 18 / 6 / 239 / 81
LISC / 39 / 13 / 10 / 3 / 246 / 83
UAC / 68 / 23 / 15 / 5 / 214 / 72
ULC / 29 / 10 / 7 / 2 / 258 / 88
UPPC / 41 / 14 / 22 / 7 / 232 / 79

University at Albany’s Climate for Governance

Over half of the faculty and professional staff polled (53%) perceive that university administration, faculty and staff Often model collegiality, respect, tolerance and civility, with another 22% reporting Sometimes, see Table 9 below.

Table 9: University at Albany’s Climate for Governance

University at Albany’s Climate for Governance
Never / Rarely / Sometimes / Often / Always / I Don't Know
Frequency / Percentage / Frequency / Percentage / Frequency / Percentage / Frequency / Percentage / Frequency / Percentage / Frequency / Percentage
How often do the University administration faculty and staff model collegiality, respect, tolerance and civility towards other members of the campus community and to each other? / 1 / 0 / 13 / 5 / 61 / 22 / 147 / 53 / 19 / 7 / 37 / 13
How often do negotiations and communication among university constituents reflect an ongoing process of transparency and understanding? / 10 / 4 / 49 / 18 / 94 / 34 / 65 / 23 / 1 / 0 / 61 / 22

Effective Consultation

More than 55% of the faculty and professional staff reported I Don’t Know if the administration and Senate engage in effective consultation for decision making in the area of long range planning (56%), decision making for existing or prospective physical resources (60%) and, or decision making in the area of budgeting (57%). see Table 10 below. Of the respondents with knowledge regarding consultation between administration and Senate, a majority were of the opinion that such consultation rarely or never occurred. (See Table 10)

Table 10: Effective Consultation