Workshop Overview

The retention of science and engineering faculty is complex and multifaceted. Analysis has shown the chance that any given science and engineering faculty member will be retained over time is less than 50%, resulting in significant institutional, economic, and societal costs.1 While various aspects have been well documented, new factors may be influencing faculty members' satisfaction and intentions to leave. 

This workshop explored the interrelationships among institutional support, broader impacts work, and faculty retention in STEM academic careers. Institutional practices and policies were considered, including attention to career-life balance, engaged scholarship, and research grant development. Topics addressed support and recognition that contribute to faculty satisfaction and advancement. The workshop presented a research model that associates retention and satisfaction with various types of support through a motivational theory framework. 

Iowa State University organized the workshop with support from the National Science Foundation. The workshop was also sponsored by the National Alliance for Broader Impacts.

Intended Audience

This workshop was intended for academic administrators, faculty, and staff who are involved in faculty development, research programs, and institutional policymaking.  It was of special interest to department chairs, deans, associate deans, provost and research office administrators, NSF ADVANCE grantees, and members of the National Alliance for Broader Impacts.  The workshop provided opportunities for individuals and teams from institutions to develop new initiatives. 

 

 

1D. Kaminski and C. Geisler, Survival Analysis of Faculty Retention in Science and Engineering by Gender, Science, 335, 864 (2012). http://www.case.edu/provost /ideal/doc/SurvivalAnalysis.pdf

This material is supported by the National Science Foundation under grant number IIA-1449187. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.