Your Title Here - Montana State University
Download
Report
Transcript Your Title Here - Montana State University
Creating a Faculty Activity
Database: Three Practical
Solutions and a Wish List
Chris Fastnow ([email protected])
Montana State University
Abstract
Faculty activity and productivity are gaining attention as calls for
accountability in higher education get louder. A central database with
information on faculty instructional, research, creative, and service
activities offers decision makers and those who support them access to
quick, accurate, and consistent information on faculty activity.
However, collecting and reporting that information presents a
logistical hurdle that most central data management systems have not
yet addressed. I will discuss a wish list for a faculty activity database
tool and our campus's experiences with three methods that we have
used to collect and access information on faculty activity: a simple
Excel-based survey, an Access database with a web interface
developed by our IT professionals, and a hierarchical database system
with a web-based or desktop user interface developed by members of
our faculty. Each has benefits and drawbacks for both the faculty
member and the IR office, but all provide workable solutions to a
difficult data collection task.
Content Warning
Shameless Plug Alert
Downer Alert
Requisite Road Map
Why develop a Faculty
Activity Database
Wish List
Three approaches to
collecting the data
Conclusion
Why Develop a Faculty
Activity Database
Accountability
Decision support
Benchmarking
Annual reviews
Centralized response capacity
Expertise list
Marketing
Why Develop a Faculty
Activity Database
Benefits of centralized collection
Common definitions
Credible data
Single intrusion
Drawbacks
Faculty resistance
Getting the right tool
Why Develop a Faculty
Activity Database
Convincing Faculty
Decrease burden on Faculty
Easy annual review reporting
Avoids duplication of effort
Decrease burden on department heads
Single format for annual reviews
Single request for information
Eases reporting requirements to central
administration
Wish List
Data Collection Tool
Web based
Flexible survey design/modification
Error checks and easy interface
Secure login
Detailed data
Rollover of some data from year to year
Wish List
Analysis/Reporting Tool
Web based
Secure login with differential access to
data
Dynamic querying
Keyword searching
Canned reports – individual annual review
report, discipline Delaware Survey report
Three Tools
1. University of Delaware’s FIPSE-funded
Faculty Out-of-Classroom Activity Study
Excel-based questionnaire
2. Access database with web interface
3. NeuroSys hierarchical database with web
interface
1. Excel Questionnaire
Faculty Questionnaire
1. Excel Questionnaire
Department Summary
1. Excel Questionnaire
We edit file, send to
Deans (annual review
cycle)
Deans send to
department heads
Department heads
send to faculty
U Del IR Office sends
file to us
Faculty respond,
return to department
heads
We create reports
Department heads
tally responses, send
to us (and Deans)
1. Excel Questionnaire
Benefits
Easy for end users
Standardized
Flexible across units
Conforms to U Del’s protocol
Simple to tally across the university
1. Excel Questionnaire
Drawbacks
Too many steps
Extra work for department head
Uneven interpretation
Loss of specific information
2. Access Database - Collection
2. Access Database - Collection
2. Access Database - Reporting
2. Access Database - Reporting
Delaware question asks for total
undergraduate advisees by
department…
2. Access Database - Reporting
…but we want to know whom faculty
advised. No other central source for
this information.
2. Access Database - Reporting
Want to know who has papers,
articles, books, or grants on math
teachers?
2. Access Database - Reporting
Details, by type of research output,
within the College of Education,
Health, and Human Development
2. Access Database
Benefits
Fairly easy web interface
Definitions readily available → more
consistent data
More detail
Query capacity
2. Access Database
Drawbacks
User error
Difficult to modify for subgroups
Scalability over time and users
Separate databases (security)
Querying limited to Access users
3. NeuroSys - Design
3. NeuroSys - Collection
3. NeuroSys - Reporting
3. NeuroSys
Benefits
Web interface
Flexible, customizable
Secure
“Ground floor opportunity”
3. NeuroSys
Drawbacks
Still developing
Faculty resistance
User error
Labor intensive
Lacks on-the-fly reporting
Wish List: Collection
Excel
Web based entry
Flexible
Access
NeuroSys
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
Dummy-proof
Secure login
Detailed data
Rollover data
√
Wish List: Reporting
Excel
Access
NeuroSys
√
√
√
Web-based reporting
Secure/differential
access
√
√
Dynamic querying
Keyword searching
Canned reports
√
√
√
Next Steps for Us
Limited NeuroSys build-up
RFP with my wish list
Challenges Across Methods
Developing useful questionnaires
Creating a culture where faculty
update data regularly
Distribution of responsibility for
hosting, funding – colleges, ITC,
central administration
Benchmark data
Want to see more?
University of Delaware’s Institutional Research and
Planning
www.udel.edu/IR/fipse/index.html
Access-Based Demo Site
www2.montana.edu/ehhd/demo
ID = msudelaware
Password = workload
NeuroSys Demo Site
neurosys.cns.montana.edu
ID = guest
Password = guest
Nth-Degree Analytics survey/reporting tool demo
www.nth-degree.com/demo