both the direct and indirect effects of the independent and intervening variables and shows the causal relationship among the various factors.
1.
Multiple Regression Analysis
The bivariate analyses laid the groundwork for the multiple regression analyses that furthered our understanding of the experience of faculty members. Three separate linear stepwise regression models with the following three dependent variables were conducted:
Dependent variable 1: Satisfaction with current position at UIC. Dependent variable 2: Satisfaction with career progression at UIC. Dependent variable 3: Consideration to leave UIC.
We ran three separate models rather than a single overall model, based on the facts that: • The causal order between these three variables cannot be determined.
• There is a strong correlation (r=0.729) between the two satisfaction variables. Collapsing them into one variable would result in a more efficient model. However, the policy implications for each of the satisfaction variables would be lost in that process.
• Using the separate satisfaction variables resulted in some redundancy in the models but has the advantage of identifying the specific factors affecting each of the satisfaction variables. While the bivariate analysis focused specifically on three independent variables, the regression and path analyses considered the following independent variables. The purpose was to ensure that the potential influence of additional factors was considered.
1. Discipline (1 = STEM, 0 = non-STEM) 2. Gender (1 = male, 0 = female)
3. Tenure (1 = yes, 0 = no)
4. Successful renegotiation of salary, summer appointment, etc. 5. Race ( 1 = Caucasian, 0 = all other)
6. Marital/Partnered status 7. Children (1 = yes, 0 = no)
8. Attitudes towards Hiring Process Scale
9. Balance Between Personal and Professional Life Scale 10. Overall research productivity
11. Respondent’s beliefs about the department’s rating of his/her productivity 12. Negative Departmental Climate Scale
13. Lack of Resources Scale
14. Departmental Support for Family Obligations Scale 15. Positive Climate for Women Scale
16. Positive Climate for Minorities Scale
17. How seriously respondent has considered leaving UIC 18. Whether respondent cares for dependent children 19. Whether respondent cares for dependent adults 20. Whether respondent has been a PI on a grant 21. Number of graduate courses taught
22. Number of undergraduate courses taught 23. Number of published articles
24. Number of published books
(a) Factors Predicting Satisfaction with Current Position at UIC
The bivariate analysis allowed us to assess only the association of satisfaction with current position at UIC with gender, rank, and discipline. The results showed that faculty satisfaction with current position did not differ based on gender, rank, or discipline. To assess multiple other factors that may influence satisfaction with current position, a linear regression analysis was conducted. The dependent variable in this model was satisfaction with current position at UIC; the independent variables were those mentioned above. The final model, with only the statistically significant predictors of satisfaction with current position, is presented in Table 34.
Table 34. Predictors of Satisfaction with Current Position at UIC
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients†4
Predictor B Std. Error Beta t Sig
CONSTANT 6.96 0.42 16.49 0.00
Negative Departmental Climate Scale -0.55 0.10 -0.34 -5.62 0.00 Lack of Resources Scale -0.40 0.07 -0.33 -5.92 0.00
Tenured 0.61 0.19 0.16 3.19 0.00
Lack of Like-Minded Colleagues Scale -0.16 0.06 -0.15 -2.62 0.01 Balance Between Personal & Professional Life Scale -0.11 0.05 -0.11 -2.05 0.04 Adjusted R2 ‡ : .381; F-value for the model = 30.87, p<.001.
Factors such as working in a more negative departmental climate and having fewer resources, fewer like-minded colleagues, and less of a balance between personal and professional lives resulted in faculty who were less satisfied with their current positions at UIC. In contrast, having tenure resulted in more satisfaction with the current position.
To assess whether there were gender differences, we looked at factors associated with
satisfaction with current position for women and men separately (Table 35). The factors associated with satisfaction for men and women are very different. The one factor that cut across gender was a negative departmental climate. Both men and women were less satisfied if they worked in a negative departmental climate. For women faculty, this was the only significant predictor of dissatisfaction.
fewer resources, and having to care for dependent children. It is important to note that the small sample size for women (n=61) may have limited the ability to detect other differences.
Table 35. Predictors of Satisfaction with Current Position with UIC, by Gender
Women (n=61) Men (n=183) Predictor Beta p-value Beta p-value
Negative Departmental Climate Scale -0.51 0.000 -0.37 0.000
Lack of Resources Scale -0.37 0.000
Tenured 0.19 0.002
Care for dependent children -0.15 0.012
Overall F 21.16; p=0.000 31.43; p=0.000
Adjusted R2 0.248 0.399
(b) Factors Predicting Satisfaction with Career Progression at UIC
The bivariate analysis examined the association of satisfaction with career progression with gender, rank, and discipline. The results showed that faculty from the non-STEM fields were more satisfied than their counterparts in the STEM fields. Additionally, in the non-STEM fields, the higher the rank, the greater the satisfaction—i.e., full professors were more satisfied than associate
professors, who were more satisfied than assistant professors.
The results of the multiple regression further examining the association of several other factors with satisfaction with career progression are presented in Table 36.
As would be expected, faculty who felt that they worked in a negative departmental climate, had fewer resources and fewer like-minded colleagues, were not PI’s on funded grants, and had lower self-rated productivity were less satisfied with their career progression. Interestingly, perceiving a more positive climate for women was associated with less satisfaction with career progression. As shown in Table 37, this is probably driven by the large number of men in the sample.
Factors associated with satisfaction with career progression were examined separately for men and women (Table 37).
Again, for both men and women, a negative departmental climate and fewer resources were associated with lower satisfaction with career progression. However, the similarity ended there, in that lower satisfaction for women was associated with productivity measures, such as fewer papers accepted and not being a PI on a funded grant. For men, lower satisfaction was associated with work climate issues, such as fewer like-minded colleagues and a perceived positive climate for women.
Table 36. Predictors of Satisfaction with Career Progression at UIC
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
B Std. Error Beta t Sig
Constant 7.03 0.71 9.94 0.00
Negative Departmental Climate Scale -0.56 0.10 -0.38 -5.58 0.00 Lack of Resources Scale -0.25 0.64 -0.23 -3.95 0.00 Lack of Like-Minded Colleagues Scale -0.19 0.06 -0.19 -3.26 0.00 Positive Climate for Women Scale -0.25 0.09 -0.16 -2.73 0.01 PI on funded research 0.39 0.16 0.14 2.52 0.01 Self-rated research productivity 0.10 0.41 0.13 2.48 0.01 Adjusted R2 = 0.224; F-value for the model = 10.995, p <.001.
Table 37. Predictors of Satisfaction with Career Progression at UIC, by Gender
Women (n=61) Men (n=182) Predictor Beta p-value Beta p-value
Negative Departmental Climate Scale -0.34 0.00 -0.37 0.00 Papers/articles accepted for publication 0.45 0.00
PI on funded research 0.32 0.01
Lack of Resources Scale -0.26 0.03 -0.24 0.00 Lack of Like-Minded Colleagues Scale -0.18 0.01 Positive Climate for Women Scale -0.14 0.05
Overall F 9.58; p=0.00 22.59; p=0.00
Adjusted R2 0.360 0.322
(c) Factors Predicting Consideration to Leave UIC
The bivariate analysis of the association of the consideration to leave UIC with gender,
discipline, and rank showed that men considered leaving more seriously than women, and faculty in non-STEM fields considered leaving more seriously than faculty in STEM fields. The multiple
regression looked at several factors that may be associated with the consideration to leave (Table 38). Faculty who considered leaving UIC were not tenured, from the non-STEM disciplines, not married or living with a partner, had not successfully renegotiated their current position, had fewer resources, and worked in a more negative departmental climate. Also, contrary to what one might expect, respondents who indicated having more departmental support for family obligations were more likely to consider leaving.
Table 38. Predictors of Consideration to Leave UIC
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
PREDICTOR B Std. Error Beta t Sig
CONSTANT 1.74 0.55 3.17 0.00
Lack of Resources Scale 0.23 0.05 0.29 4.50 0.00 Negative Departmental Climate Scale 0.33 0.08 0.30 4.22 0.00 Successful renegotiation -0.32 0.13 -0.15 -2.52 0.01 Department supports family obligations 0.18 0.07 0.17 2.55 0.01
Tenured -0.32 0.15 -0.13 -2.22 0.03
STEM discipline -0.29 0.12 -0.14 -2.44 0.02 Married/Partnered -0.16 0.08 -0.12 -1.99 0.05 Adjusted R2 = 0.351; F-value for the model = 22.844, p<.001.
Table 39. Predictors of Consideration to Leave UIC, by Gender
Women only (n=60) Men only (n=183) PREDICTOR Beta p-value Beta p-value
Negative Departmental Climate Scale 0.34 0.01 0.17 0.02
Lack of Resources Scale 0.322 0.00
STEM discipline -0.25 0.04 -0.14 0.04
factors that cut across gender. Additionally, men who more seriously considered leaving had fewer resources and had not successfully renegotiated their positions. The factor related to faculty having more departmental support for family obligations was not significant for either gender.
Summary
Overall, the multiple regression analyses showed that working in a negative departmental climate was a significant factor across gender related to satisfaction with current position and career progression, as well as consideration to leave UIC—i.e., the more negative the departmental climate, the less satisfied faculty were with their current positions and career progression and the more likely they were to consider leaving UIC.
The factors associated with satisfaction with current position were a combination of work climate, resources, and tenure issues. The only factor associated with women being less satisfied with current position was working in a negative departmental climate. However, for men, in addition to a negative working climate, working with fewer resources, not having tenure, and caring for dependent children was associated with less satisfaction.
Factors associated with satisfaction with career progression were work climate, resources, and productivity issues. Women reported being less satisfied with their current positions if they worked in a negative departmental climate, did not have papers accepted, were not PIs on funded grants, and had fewer resources. On the other hand, men were less satisfied with their career progression if they worked in a negative departmental climate, had fewer resources, had fewer like-minded colleagues, and worked in a climate perceived as positive for women.
Consideration to leave UIC was associated with work climate, resources, tenure, discipline, and family issues. Women were more likely to consider leaving if they worked in a negative departmental climate and were from a non-STEM discipline. Men were more likely to consider leaving if they worked in a negative departmental climate, were from a non-STEM field, had fewer resources, and had not successfully renegotiated their positions.
Negative departmental climate was the only factor that cut across issues of satisfaction and consideration of leaving. Lack of resources was the second most important factor.
2. Path Analysis
The individual regression analyses discussed above show the direct effects of the independent variables on each of the three dependent variables. On the other hand, the path model shows the direct and indirect effects of the independent and intervening variables and places the data into a causal framework. For example, while the individual regression models show that a lack of
departmental resources increases the likelihood of a faculty member thinking of leaving UIC, the path model suggests that the impact is indirect—that resources influence thoughts of leaving through overall dissatisfaction.
Because the data are cross-sectional, the causal order laid out in the path model is theoretical and is based on assumptions about the temporal ordering of the variables in the model. Variables on the far left of the model are present before all others, while those on the far right are impacted by all variables before them. For example, the model assumes that demographic variables (race, gender) are present before all others, that these influence perceptions about the department, that those
perceptions in turn influence satisfaction, and that satisfaction then affects considerations about leaving UIC (see Figure 6 on p. 43 and Figure 7 on p. 47).
Exogenous variables (gender, race, rank, etc.) Climate variables (resources, climate
for women & minorities, etc.) Overall satisfaction How seriously faculty considered leaving UIC Figure 6. Assumed Causal Ordering of Variables in Path Model
The path analysis consists of a series of ordinary least squares regressions, using four levels of variables:
• Exogenous variables, such as race, gender, and rank;
• Climate variables, such as resource availability and climate for women and minorities; • Satisfaction with position and career progression—represented by overall satisfaction; and • How seriously the respondent ever considered leaving UIC.
Figure 6 outlines the assumed causal order of the variables. While it shows the theoretical model, Figure 7 (p. 47) shows the results of the path analysis and includes only those variables that were statistically significant, controlling for all other variables in the model.
(a) Path Model Predicting Consideration to Leave UIC
As discussed earlier, overall, 12% of respondents said they had never considered leaving UIC. Thirty-five percent said they had considered it very seriously, 26% had considered it moderately seriously, and 27% had considered it slightly seriously.
To determine which factors influence considerations to leave, the variable leave was regressed on all the scales and exogenous variables described above. This model differs from the previous
regression model predicting considerations to leave in that it includes overall satisfaction as a predictor variable. Overall satisfaction was a variable created by combining the two satisfaction variables. The results from this analysis are presented in Table 40.
Table 40. Predictors of How Seriously Faculty Have Considered Leaving UIC
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
Predictor B Std. Error Beta t Sig
CONSTANT 4.710 .190 24.770 .000
STEM discipline -.372 .107 -.182 -3.489 .001 Overall satisfaction -.415 .040 -.548 -10.482 .000 Successful renegotiation .400 .113 .185 3.541 .000 Adjusted R2=.337; F-value=41.790; p<.000.
(b) Predictors of Overall Satisfaction
Because satisfaction has such a large impact on considerations to leave, the next step of the analysis was to determine the factors that influence satisfaction. The same set of independent variables was entered as in stage one, with the exception of satisfaction, which is the dependent variable in this analysis. The output from this analysis is presented in Table 41.
Table 41. Predictors of Overall Satisfaction
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
Predictor B Std. Error Beta t Sig
CONSTANT 8.368 .587 14.260 .000
Lack of Like-Minded Colleagues -.165 .052 -.175 -3.195 .002
Tenured -.343 .167 -.101 -2.051 .041
Negative Departmental Climate -.547 .094 -.385 -5.832 .000 Lack of Resources -.350 .058 -.327 -6.023 .000 Department supports family obligations -.177 .081 -.127 -2.178 .030 Adjusted R2=.398; F-value=34.219; p<.000.
Five factors in the final model predicted overall satisfaction. The biggest impact on satisfaction was a negative climate in one’s department. Negative climate indicates a high endorsement of items such as “I feel excluded from informal networks in my department” and “I have a voice in how resources are allocated within my department.” Faculty who felt unvalued and unheard were much less satisfied than those who felt they were well integrated into their departments.
A lack of departmental resources, such as equipment and supplies, had the next largest impact on satisfaction, with those who found resources lacking less satisfied. Those lacking supportive colleagues (those doing similar research or providing career advice) were also less satisfied with their position and career progress.
The impact of resources, departmental climate, and colleagues on overall satisfaction was clearly what one would expect and paralleled the findings of the regression analyses, which predicted both satisfaction with current position and satisfaction with career progression. People who worked in a negative environment that lacked both resources and sympathetic colleagues were neither satisfied overall nor satisfied with their positions or careers. As in the case of the regression analysis that predicted consideration to leave, faculty who found the department more supportive of family
obligations were more likely to leave, and in the path model, faculty who found the department more supportive of family obligations were less satisfied overall. In contrast to the regression analyses that predicted satisfaction with current position, in the path model we found that faculty with tenure were less satisfied overall. These two findings are counterintuitive and at this juncture difficult to interpret.
(c) Predictors of Negative Departmental Climate
The next three regression equations focused on the departmental climate scales that were significant predictors of satisfaction and considerations of leaving, namely, Negative Departmental Climate, Lack of Resources, and Lack of Like-Minded Colleagues. The independent variables in these models include demographic variables, whether the respondent has ever cared for dependent
children, tenure status, discipline, teaching load, publication history, self-rated productivity, respondent’s assessment of department-rated productivity, successful renegotiation, and grant receipt.
The results of the first equation, which predicts negative departmental climate, are presented in Table 42. Having been a PI on a grant, having a successful renegotiation, believing that the
department rates one as more productive than average, Caucasian race, and caring or having cared for children were all significantly related to a more positive assessment of departmental climate. The regression and path analyses included race in a collapsed form: First, we collapsed all the responses that were not “White” into one group, thereby increasing the sample numbers in that group. The analysis then looked at what percent of the variance in the intervening and dependent variables is explained by being white/non-white and found it to be statistically significant. By including race in this way, we controlled for its impact in our examination of the effects of other variables (e.g., rank, tenure status).
Teaching load and self-rated productivity were related to negative feelings about the
department. Faculty teaching more undergraduate or graduate courses and who rated themselves as more productive than average were more likely to find the departmental environment negative. These relationships also are supported by some of the comments in the open-ended questions, where respondents complained about heavy teaching loads and lack of productivity on the part of
colleagues. For example, when asked which factors detract most from their satisfaction at UIC, one respondent replied, “Overload of teaching that interferes with research.” Another commented on “high teaching loads, lack of communication in my department that results in isolation.”
Other comments regarding the lack of productivity by colleagues included the following: “inactive faculty who do not take academic environment seriously. Have no research and publication activity,” “Supposed to be merit-based university but faculty who complain but do not meet criteria get too much of a hearing,” and “...it’s very discouraging to see weak scholars being promoted while lowly paid, good lecturers are being taken advantage of.” It is not surprising that a productive faculty member who shares this sentiment about colleagues would rate the departmental climate as negative. Table 42. Predictors of Negative Departmental Climate (as Perceived by Respondents)
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
Predictor B Std. Error Beta t Sig
CONSTANT 3.611 .380 9.502 .000
PI on grant -.286 .115 -.146 -2.488 .013
Successful renegotiation -.235 .114 -.117 -2.063 .040
White -.444 .141 -.181 -3.162 .002
Ever cared for children -.267 .114 -.133 -2.331 .021 Number of undergraduate courses taught .191 .057 .205 3.349 .001 Number of graduate courses taught .178 .070 .151 2.546 .011 Self-rated productivity .117 .036 .218 3.215 .001 Perception of department-rated productivity -.174 .031 -.388 -5.679 .000 Adjusted R2 = .193; F-value = 8.874, p<.000.
Table 43. Predictors of Departmental Lack of Resources (as Perceived by Respondents)
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
Predictor B Std. Error Beta t Sig
CONSTANT 3.160 .244 12.969 .000
PI or co-PI on a grant -.610 .159 -.236 -3.828 .000 Number of undergraduate courses taught .267 .076 .218 3.521 .001 Adjusted R2=.068; F-value=10.629, p<.000.
Faculty who were PIs or co-PIs on a grant in the preceding two years were less likely to say their department lacks resources, while those teaching a high number of undergraduate courses were more likely to say it lacks resources. These two variables explain a small percentage of the variance in the dependent variable (6.8%). The factors that have an impact on the level of resources are obviously outside the scope of the survey and probably include budgets cuts imposed from outside the University.
(e) Predictors of Lack of Like-Minded Colleagues
The only predictor of lack of like-minded colleagues was perception of the department’s rating of productivity. Respondents who feel their department rates them as above average were less likely to feel that they have like-minded colleagues (see Table 44).
Table 44. Predictors of Lack of Like-Minded Colleagues
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized Coefficients
Predictor B Std. Error Beta t Sig
CONSTANT 3.933 .290 13.546 .000
Perception of department-rated productivity -.152 .041 -.225 -3.722 .000 Adjusted R2=.047; F-value=13.855, p<.000.
Figure 7 shows the overall model predicting how seriously respondents have considered leaving UIC.
Figure 7. Path Model for Complete Sample STEM Tenured Undergrad courses taught