Employee Satisfaction Survey Page 50
ADVERTISEMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89APPENDIX J. RESULTS BY APPOINTMENT – FACULTY (CONT.)
GSBS
PLFSOM
SOAHS
SOM
SON
SOP
Mean*
n
SD
Mean
n
SD
Mean
n
SD
Mean
n
SD
Mean
n
SD
Mean
n
SD
1. Institutional leaders’ awareness
3.60
48
1.43
3.74
38
1.55
4.35
40
1.23
4.02
102
1.29
4.26
35
1.46
3.35
34
1.41
of faculty needs
2. Communication with my chair
4.33
46
1.66
4.35
37
1.83
4.76
38
1.58
4.81
97
1.41
4.63
35
1.54
3.85
34
1.50
3. Effectiveness of Faculty Senators
3.64
42
1.57
3.74
34
1.36
4.83
35
1.01
4.15
78
1.31
4.74
34
1.21
3.72
32
1.55
in representing my interests
4. Collaboration among faculty
3.82
44
1.42
3.42
31
1.48
3.87
38
1.38
4.29
94
1.02
3.76
33
1.37
3.21
34
1.47
across schools
5. Formal evaluation process of
3.96
46
1.50
3.91
34
1.36
4.26
39
1.29
4.23
99
1.36
4.03
32
1.49
3.78
32
1.50
faculty
6. Clarity of the tenure process
4.40
43
1.43
3.83
29
1.51
4.61
33
0.83
4.76
79
1.17
4.08
26
1.52
3.84
25
1.55
7. Clarity of the promotion process
4.29
45
1.52
3.73
33
1.46
4.35
37
1.21
4.54
89
1.28
4.13
32
1.54
3.67
33
1.76
*Res pondents were a s ked to i ndi ca te thei r l evel of s a tis fa ction us i ng a 6-poi nt s ca l e ( 1 = Very Dissatisfied , 2 = Dissatisfied , 3 = Somewhat Dissatisfied , 4 = Somewhat Satisfied , 5 = Satisfied , a nd 6 = Very
Satisfied ). Mea ns a re col or‐coded to hi ghl i ght a rea s of s trength a nd potentia l i mprovement (Red: <3.00, Yel l ow: 3.00‐3.99, Green: ≥5.00).
50
ADVERTISEMENT
0 votes
Related Articles
Related forms
Related Categories
Parent category: Life