Resources

Faculty constitute human resources, and they need adequate financial and physical resources to meet University expectations for teaching and research. Financial resources devoted to instruction and research are discussed primarily in Chapters 3, 7, and 8, and physical resources such as facilities and computing are discussed primarily in Chapters 10 and 11.

The last decade has seen dramatic change in the faculty. Since 1988, we have hired 43% of our current tenured/tenure-track faculty, and the number of tenured/tenure-track faculty have increased by 26%, from 278 to 349. The number of non-tenure-track full-time faculty decreased from 56 in 1988 to 31 in 1996; and part-time faculty decreased from 31 to 23. Faculty satisfaction with Michigan Tech and success at achieving tenure has allowed us to retain most of these new faculty.

Administrative Structure and Human Resources

The faculty is appropriately qualified, well-distributed by rank, and uses peer review in decision making. As outlined in the Faculty Handbook, faculty are classified into various categories, including:

1. tenured/tenure-track faculty (responsible for both teaching and research),
2. research faculty (with limited teaching responsibilities), and
3. non-tenure-track faculty (with limited research responsibilities).

In 1995, the University clarified its classification system for tenurable and non-tenure-track faculty, eliminating non-tenure-track Assistant and Associate Professor titles. All Department Chairs, College Deans, Vice Provosts, and the Provost are currently tenured faculty members. Faculty are not represented by a union.

Michigan Tech's faculty is well qualified for its responsibilities in teaching and research, and the quantity and quality of tenured/tenure-track faculty is appropriate to a doctoral institution (see Appendix 2: BID, Form C). In 1996, Michigan Tech employed 349 tenured/tenure-track faculty. Ninety-one percent of tenured/tenure-track faculty have doctorates, compared to 84% in 1988. Additionally, several faculty have terminal master's degrees in their fields. Distribution of faculty by department is shown in the Undergraduate Catalog [1.3A] and Graduate School Bulletin [1.3B], and discussed in departmental self-studies [2.6]. Faculty transcripts and proofs of degree are on file in the Office of the Provost.

Faculty are well distributed by rank (see Table 11, below). Tenured faculty constitute 75% of tenurable faculty, compared to 56% at research universities nationally. [1]

TABLE 11. Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty—By Rank and Gender.

Faculty Rank	1988				1996
	Male	Female	Total	Rank %	Male	Female	Total	Rank %
Full Professor	62	3	65	23%	103	9	112	32%
Associate	104	19	123	44%	124	30	154	44%
Assistant	77	13	90	33%	62	21	83	24%
Total	243	35	278	100%	289	60	349	100%

Source: Institutional Analysis (Fall Headcount)

Academic administration is decentralized and uses peer review. After the Provost authorizes a faculty position, decisions about faculty appointments, promotion and tenure, merit pay, and development are made at the department level. Departmental charters [3.4] outline appropriate procedures, which vary somewhat by department, but all involve peer review. College and School Deans and committees provide a second level of peer review for appointments, promotion and tenure, and final decisions are made by the Board of Control. Department Chairs make decisions about merit pay and faculty development.

Hiring

Michigan Tech is succeeding in attracting excellent new faculty. We have hired 170 new faculty since 1988, 151 of whom remain at Michigan Tech. As a result, we now enjoy a relatively new faculty—43% of the current faculty have been appointed since 1988. Departmental self-studies report satisfaction with new appointments and no problems finding qualified candidates. The Faculty Survey corroborates this satisfaction and quality: 59% of respondents report at least one job offer in addition to ours, and 27% had more than three offers.

Since 1993, faculty appointments have become part of the strategic planning process. Funding for new faculty is strategically allocated to support program needs or other University goals, such as attaining AACSB accreditation for the School of Business and Economics. Until this year, each department competed with others for positions through the realignment process (discussed in Chapter 1, Response to Concern 3). In July 1997, a pilot position control program was implemented; vacant positions revert to the Provost, and are dealt with on a case-by-case basis.

The University has clarified policies and procedures to guide searches for new faculty positions. In 1991, the Affirmative Action Office published a Hiring Guide [1.5B2], which provides information on forming search committees, advertising, and interviewing. In 1995, the Office of the Provost published the Academic/Research Faculty Hiring Guide [1.5B1], which outlines a hiring procedure and provides model letters of tender. Most departmental charters now include search procedures for new faculty, including department chairs. National searches are conducted for new tenure-track faculty positions, and search committees with diverse memberships are formed to provide multiple opportunities for faculty input into the hiring process. Departments advertise in discipline-specific media, as well as using innovative electronic media and personal contacts. The Faculty Survey [6.2B4] revealed the importance of personal contacts in the hiring process: 44% of respondents became aware of Michigan Tech through personal contacts vs. 36% through traditional advertisements.

Factors which attract faculty to Michigan Tech are consistent with our educational purposes. The Faculty Survey revealed that the single strongest factor attracting faculty to Michigan Tech was the quality of undergraduate students. The reputation of the University or the department, departmental specialty, and collegial fellow faculty were also strong attractions, suggesting our faculty care about the intellectual climate for learning and scholarship. Our geographical location, with its outdoor recreational activities and small town lifestyle, strongly appeal to faculty who have chosen to come and remain at Michigan Tech, making it a strength for faculty recruitment. Although benefits were also a positive factor, material incentives of salary or start-up funds did not stand out as significant factors attracting faculty to Michigan Tech. This may be because we continue to lag in faculty salaries compared to our benchmark institutions (see "Compensation" below). The Library was in some cases a negative factor in attracting faculty (see Chapter 10).

Departments report generally adequate start-up funds, which are individually negotiated for each new faculty member. The Research Excellence Fund (REF) and a $200,000 start-up pool administered by the Vice Provost for Research provide some support for new and junior faculty (see Chapter 8). Some departments give new faculty release time to prepare courses and get a research program started.

Diversity

Multiple initiatives to appoint more women and underrepresented faculty—a University objective—have led to some success (see Chapter 1, Response to Concern 2). Since 1988, the number of tenured/tenure-track women faculty grew by 71%, from 33 to 60, which represents an increase from 13% to 17% of the tenurable faculty. The increase was particularly significant in the engineering faculty, where numbers of women faculty grew from 2 in 1988 to 12 in 1996; this represents a 7% increase in tenured/tenure-track engineering faculty.

During this same period, the numbers of other underrepresented faculty have grown slightly, from 32 to 53, or 12% to 15% of the tenured/tenure-track faculty (see Chapter 1, Table 2). The percentage of underrepresented faculty declines as rank increases, from 19% of Assistant Professors to 11% of Full Professors. Except for Asian Americans, candidate pools for underrepresented faculty in science and engineering remain small.

Michigan Tech has participated in Michigan's King-Chavez-Parks programs for Visiting Scholars to attract underrepresented faculty since 1987/88, and since 1992, the administration has encouraged recruitment of women and underrepresented faculty by providing new faculty positions to departments who recruited qualified candidates (see Chapter 9 for a discussion of University-wide affirmative action initiatives). A concern is our ability to attract dual career couples. Our remote location in a small town presents few job opportunities for spouses, particularly professional spouses. Michigan Tech does not have a spousal hiring policy or a policy for hiring dual career couples, although the PCW (Presidential Commission for Women) has been working on a policy for several years and the University Senate recommended in 1996 that such a policy be developed. Nonetheless, departments, supported by the administration, have been creative in efforts to hire dual career couples. This has led to a few conflicts (see "Integrity"). Hiring dual career couples can have a significant impact on our ability to hire more women faculty. Improved child care programs would also help attract and retain faculty with young children. It is recommended that the University adopt recommendations made by the PCW in "Child Care Needs and Implications for MTU" [5.6C].

Promotion and Tenure

Michigan Tech has retained most of the faculty it appoints—83% since 1988—including women faculty. Most achieve tenure; only 20 faculty received terminal contracts or were denied tenure since 1988. There is no evidence that women or individuals from underrepresented groups are failing to obtain tenure or promotion or are resigning at a disproportionate rate [6.2B4]. Structured evaluation processes and faculty development programs help faculty succeed at Michigan Tech (see "Development" below).

Evaluation and feedback processes are mandated for tenure-track faculty. As outlined in the Faculty Handbook [1.2A1], tenure-track faculty receive annual reviews and biennial "major" reviews for reappointment. The tenure review is formalized in the preparation of "Form F" [1.5A2] and accompanying documents. However, the Faculty Handbook does not discuss what constitutes a review, and the quality, timeliness, and usefulness of interim reviews vary across departments. Senior faculty and department chairs do not always provide consistent and timely feedback about expectations and performance appropriate to the individual faculty member. Instituting departmental charters [3.4] in 1996 was one response to this perceived weakness.

Evaluation and feedback are less structured for tenured faculty. Departments maintain current curricula vitae for faculty, and there is an annual curriculum vitae update which documents teaching, research, and service activities. Form F serves for promotion as well as tenure reviews. However, evaluations by department chairs are inconsistently recorded across departments and there is no standard time or criteria for post-tenure review across departments.

Despite these weaknesses, faculty succeed and stay at Michigan Tech, for the same reasons that they were attracted in the first place. Only 7% of Faculty Survey respondents report plans to seek jobs elsewhere.

NEXT