22 October 2007

Dear Colleagues,

The Teaching and Learning Center Advisory Committee thanks all of you who completed the survey.  The Committee wishes to thank Provost Jill Tiefenthaler, Associate Provost Michele Gillespie, and Assistant to the Provost Anita Hughes for helping to make the survey available to the College and Calloway.

The Committee is also grateful to Jeff Muday and Scott Claybrook from the WFU Instructional Technology Group for survey implementation and deployment.

Please note that the Committee has included a Summary and an Analysis following the results of the Survey.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey D. Lerner, Director, History
Sharon Andrews, Theatre
Sarah Barbour, Romance Languages
Leah McCoy, Education
Gordon McCray, Calloway
Peter Siavelis, Political Science
Wayne Silver, Biology

Faculty Survey – Teaching and Learning Center Committee - Fall, 2007

SURVEY RESULTS

Total Responses: 153

an * indicates a required question

1. Years at Wake Forest*
[Question Type Radio Option Button] Response | Percent Response | Total

Total Respondents to this question 153
Total Respondents who did not complete this question 0

2. Faculty status:*
[Question Type Radio Option Button] Response | Percent Response | Total

Total Respondents to this question 153
Total Respondents who did not complete this question 0
Other Responses: Visiting Assistant Professor, Senior Lecturer, Lecturer

3. The area of my teaching and scholarship is
[Question Type Checkbox] Response | Percent Response | Total

Total Respondents to this question 161
Total Respondents who did not complete this question 0

4. For the purposes of performance reviews, scholarship is gaining importance at Wake Forest (i.e. publications, performances, and exhibits).*
[Question Type Radio Option Button] Response | Percent Response | Total

Total Respondents to this question 153
Total Respondents who did not complete this question 0

5. For the purposes of performance reviews, scholarship should be gaining importance at Wake Forest.*
[Question Type Radio Option Button] Response | Percent Response | Total

Total Respondents to this question 153
Total Respondents who did not complete this question 0

6. For the purposes of performance reviews, teaching is gaining importance at Wake Forest.*
[Question Type Radio Option Button] Response | Percent Response | Total

Total Respondents to this question 153
Total Respondents who did not complete this question 0

7. For the purposes of performance reviews, teaching should be gaining importance at Wake Forest. *
[Question Type Radio Option Button} Response | Percent Response | Total

Total Respondents to this question 153
Total Respondents who did not complete this question 0

8. Do your interests lie primarily in teaching or research?*
[Question Type Radio Option Button] Response | Percent Response | Total

Total Respondents to this question 153
Total Respondents who did not complete this question 0

10. If you answered time allocated to other activities please describe briefly.
            For an overview of the comments, please see the Summary/Analysis.

11. What percentage of your time would you ideally allocate to each activity?
[Question Type Multiple Line Input Response] Respondents 153

12. If you answered time allocated to other activities, please describe briefly.
For an overview of the comments, please see the Summary/Analysis.               

13. Comments on time allocations for teaching, scholarship, service and administrative work.
For an overview of the comments, please see the Summary/Analysis.

14. How can the Teaching and Learning Center assist you in your teaching?
For an overview of the comments, please see the Summary/Analysis.

Summary and Analysis

Questions 1-3. Demographics. 

Of the 153 respondents to the survey, the largest groups represented are individuals who have been at Wake Forest for 20 or more years (30%) and those who have been here for 1-6 years (26%).  In terms of faculty status, most respondents were Professors (40%), followed by Associate Professors (28%) and Assistant Professors (19%).  Finally, the three largest groups represented in the survey are humanities (28%), natural science and math (19%), and social science (19%).

Questions 4-5. For the purposes of performance reviews, scholarship (i.e., publications, performances, and exhibits):

Questions 6-7.  For the purposes of performance reviews, teaching:

Analysis

A comparison of questions 4-5 and 6-7 reveals:

• 90% of respondents “agree” or “strongly agree” that scholarship is gaining importance for performance reviews.
• 26% of respondents “agree” or “strongly agree” that teaching is gaining importance for performance reviews.
• Respondents believe that both scholarship and teaching should be gaining importance with, 78% who “agree” or “strongly agree” that scholarship should gaining importance and 82% who “agree” or “strongly agree” that teaching should be gaining importance.

Question 8.  Do your interests lie primarily in teaching or research?

Analysis:

• The majority of respondents (45%) are interested in teaching and research equally.
• 22% of respondents are interested in both but lean more toward teaching
• 18% of respondents are interested in both but lean more toward research.

Question 9. How do you currently allocate your work time by percentages?  (Choose Teaching, Scholarship, Service, Administration, Other)

Aggregate Results:

Analysis: 
While these averages are revealing it is also instructive to look at the actual breakdown of responses with respect to deviations from the mean.  Averages can be quite deceiving. While in the area of teaching most answered 40% or 50% as their current time allocation, when it comes to scholarship, there were much more varied responses and less uniformity.  While the average was 27% for scholarship, answers were much more dispersed.  This suggests a wider variation across campus in the time allocated to scholarship.

Question 10.  If you answered time allocated to other activities please describe briefly.

Sixteen respondents included variety of activities, such as answering e-mails.  However, if there is any trend, it is that the “other” area included some important issues overlooked in the survey:  academic advising, advising student groups, and writing letters of recommendation.

Question 11.  What percentage of your time would you ideally allocate to each activity?

Aggregate Results:

Analysis

These averages, though illuminating, are somewhat deceptive in comparison to the actual breakdown of responses with respect to deviations from the mean.  When examined separately, each category’s average appears more fluid.  For example, 105 people ranked the “Ideal Teaching Time Allocation” and 87 others allotted the “Ideal Scholarship Time Allocation” between 40% and 59%.  110 individuals measured the “Ideal Service Time Allocation” and 135 others placed the “Ideal Administrative Effort Allocation” as 0-10%.

Analysis: Questions 9 and 11.

A telling comparison exists between current time allocations and ideal time allocations (Question 9: “How do you currently allocate your work time by percentages?” and Question 11: “What percentage of your time would you ideally allocate to each activity?”)
           

This comparison suggests:

• Respondents are generally satisfied with the amount of time allocated to teaching.
• Respondents would like to dedicate more time to scholarship.
• Respondents would like to dedicate slightly less time to service.
• Respondents would like to dedicate less time to administrative work.

Question 12. If you answered time allocation to other activities, please describe briefly. 

For the seven individuals, who answered time allocation to “other activities,” most stipulated service to the community or the profession as their primary activity.

Question 13. Comments on time allocations for teaching, scholarship, service and administrative work. 

There were 58 respondents and 95 non-respondents to this question.

• Four individuals express satisfaction with the balance that they have achieved.
• One respondent suggests more focus on research is needed in order to promote teaching excellence.
• Several express varying degrees of dissatisfaction with the current allocation of their time; some also provide suggestions on how to remedy this situation.

The majority of comments and suggestions fall into the following categories:

1. There are three principal reasons cited for the imbalance of time allocations:

• The increasing expectations of the administration for faculty to increase research, to maintain current teaching loads, and to teach more effectively, and to meet the growing demands of service and/or administrative responsibilities.
• The inequities within departments in terms of how much service one is expected to perform.

Note: of these three reasons, the second was cited by well over half of those who responded.

2. Overall, the frustration with the imbalance of time allocations stems from the sense that the current system cannot accommodate either the personal or the institutional desire to attain excellence in both teaching and scholarship.

3. A number of respondents want more transparency and equity in terms of expectations of teaching, research, and service, at both the administrative and the departmental levels.

• One recommendation is that a point system be implemented.
• A second recommendation is for more clarification at the department level.
• Those who identify themselves as new faculty express confusion about what is expected of them.
• Two respondents call for regular sabbaticals and/or a policy for faculty to develop and enhance their teaching.

Analysis

It is notable that although there is some skepticism as to whether a teacher-scholar model is attainable, the majority of respondents embrace it for two reasons: (i) this is the model that drew them to the profession and in particular to Wake Forest; (ii) respondents believe that, when given an appropriate amount of time, teaching and scholarship enrich one another.

Suggestions for changing the current imbalance fall into three categories:

• Clarification about the expectations of teaching, research, and service at the departmental and administrative level.
• The need for equity across the campus and Calloway.
• The implementation of a sabbatical policy that would be used by faculty for research and/or teaching.

Question 14: How can the Teaching and Learning Center assist you in your teaching?

There were 61 respondents and 92 non-respondents to this question.

Eleven responses were essentially “keep up the good work.”  Five respondents had little or no need of the TLC or did not know how the TLC might assist them.

The rest of the comments and suggestions fell into the following categories:

1. Promoting the value of teaching

• Four responses stress that the TLC should strive to equalize the value of teaching and research.
• One suggestion is that the name of the center should be changed to "Teacher-Scholar Center" or the "Teacher-Scholar Support Center" in order to fit more suitably with the teacher-scholar model.

2. Rewarding good teaching

• A respondent suggests that the TLC expand its recognition of good teaching beyond its Teaching Innovation Award to include different awards for different types of categories, such as “Most Innovative Team-Taught Course.”

3. Information of best and new pedagogical practices

• The majority of comments belong to this category. Respondents suggest that the TLC keep faculty informed about the newest research in pedagogy and to provide them with best practices.
• A number of other suggestions address the need to invite experts to speak about effective teaching and for the TLC to provide more forums on innovations in the classroom.

4. Direct help with tasks related to teaching

• Several respondents request that the TLC hire individuals with an M.A. in English to grade writing assignments.
• Others want statistical assistants to help students with the mechanics of finding data sets, downloading them, and having them run specific programs.
• Another group would like the TLC to offer assistance about using Blackboard and effectively using classroom space.

5. Assessment of teaching effectiveness

• There are a number of respondents who indicate a desire for the TLC to improve teaching assessments by working with department chairs to provide feedback; to improve methods for assessing teaching on a course by course basis; to develop mid-semester evaluation methods; to assist with creating tenure portfolios; to examine all faculty evaluations written by students, analyzing them across campus, and providing individual faculty with the means to compare their personal results; and to determine more creative ways to use student evaluations.

6. Student involvement

• Comments in this section call for implementing methods to encourage students to take responsibility for their learning; to pursue alternatives to strengthen student learning skills; and to solicit information from students about which teaching methods engage them in learning and which do not. 

7. Time restraints

• The five comments in this section concern why individuals are unable to attend TLC sessions: either they have no time or the sessions conflict with teaching and other duties.

8. Time suggestions

• Suggestions for addressing problems of time constraints include: bringing sessions to individual departments; continuing to provide end of semester newsletters that recap that semester’s sessions; lobby to get rid of administrative paperwork; and to have more information on-line.

9. Funds and compensations

• Suggestions in this category include: providing money for datasets and summer research; creating teaching fellowships equivalent to research fellowships; and routing information about grants for teaching projects to faculty by discipline or multidisciplinary areas.

10. Other Comments

• Comments in this section relate to the need for the TLC to become more significant and more visible to the faculty and that the TLC should be recommended as a resource to junior faculty.