Analysis of MU-ADVANCE Offer Survey

Year 2 Results

MU-ADVANCE extended its offer survey for the second consecutive year in a continued effort to evaluate the recruitment practices at Marshall. The surveys were distributed to every male and female candidate that received an offer from a STEM department over the past two years, whether they accepted or not. The survey was housed on our external evaluator’s website; therefore, the responses are confidential and anonymous to all Marshall personnel. As was the case in our first assessment, no surveys were completed by those who declined the offer from Marshall. 

Rating by importance (extremely, slightly, not very, not at all) as to why they chose to accept or decline the Marshall offer, respondents answered a variety of questions based on personal and career factors. From the searches conducted during the 2007-08 academic year, nine offer surveys were completed. Of these, 4 were female and 5 males, all whom accepted the Marshall offer. In addition to the Marshall offer, the participants reported that three of them received two other offers, two received three other offers, one received one offer, and one received no other offers since he/she only applied at Marshall. Prior to coming to Marshall, eight of the respondents listed their previous positions as: 3 post-docs, an associate professor an Institution of Higher Education (IHE), and one instructor at an IHE. Personal communication served as the highest means of dissemination of job availabilities at Marshall, followed by professional journals or newsletters, the Chronicle of Higher Education, the Marshall website, the American Mathematical Society,  the APA monitor, and a professional meeting. An analysis from the offer survey from the Fall 2007 offers was reported in our weekly update on January 25, 2008.

As listed in Table 1 below, the “Impression of the Department” received the highest number of responses as being the most important factor in the candidates’ decision to come to Marshall, followed by “Research Opportunities” and the “Start-Up Package.” Generating the least amount of importance was “Child Care” availability. Participants also provided the following suggestions for improvement at Marshall in recruiting qualified candidates: offer higher salaries, especially to candidates who have teaching and research experience; moving expenses assistance; additional travel monies to national meetings; and lower teaching loads.

A follow-up survey was created and administered to the new hires from the 2007-08 academic year. An analysis of those results will be featured in next week’s Update.

Table 1: Mean ratings computed for the 16 respondents (2007 and 2008 separate and pooled).  Scale: 5 = extremely important, 4 = very important, 3 = slightly important, 2 = not very important, 1  = not at all important).

 
         

 

2007 Mean

2008 Mean

Pooled Mean

  

 

N = 7

N = 9

N = 16

  

Impression of the department

3.6

3.6

3.6

  

Research opportunities

3.3

2.8

3

  

Start-up package

3.1

2.7

2.9

  

Department size

2.6

2.9

2.8

  

Salary

2.9

2.8

2.8

  

Facilities and/or laboratories

2.4

2.8

2.6

  

Potential for advancement

3.1

2.2

2.6

  

Geographical region

2.1

2.9

2.5

  

University size

2.6

2.2

2.4

  

Potential for department/university collaboration

2.4

2.3

2.3

  

Presence of ADVANCE at Marshall

2.7

1.1

1.8

  

Career for partner at Marshall or in the area

1

2.3

1.7

  

City size

1.9

1.2

1.5

  

My partner is working in the area

1.1

1.3

1.2

  

I have relatives living in the area

1

1.2

1.1

  

Child care

0.7

0.3

0.5

  

 

 

MU-ADVANCE Home