University of Maryland School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Notre Dame of Maryland University School of Pharmacy, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Am J Pharm Educ. 2023 May;87(5):100033. doi: 10.1016/j.ajpe.2022.11.006. Epub 2023 Mar 15.
To assess how department chairs/administrators define, measure, and evaluate faculty workload to better understand practices within the Academy.
An 18-item survey was distributed to department chairs/administrators via American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Connect. Participants identified if they are a primary decision maker for faculty workload, whether their program has a workload policy, how workload is calculated, and how faculty satisfaction with workload equity is measured.
Of 71 participants initiating the survey, data from 64 participants from 52 colleges/schools were eligible for analysis. Leaders of practice departments reported that their faculty spend an average of 38% of their time on teaching (compared to 46% for non-practice departments), 13% on research (vs 37%), 12% on service (vs 16%), and 36% on clinical practice (vs 0%). Most survey participants (n = 57, 89%) are at schools/colleges with a tenure system, and about 24 participants reported that faculty workload metrics differ across departments/divisions. Teaching assignments and service are reportedly negotiable between faculty and supervisors, and workload expectations are widely variable. The majority indicated they do not analyze faculty satisfaction with workload fairness (n = 35) and faculty do not provide evaluative feedback on how supervisors assign faculty workload (n = 34). Of 6 priorities considered when determining workload, 'support college/school strategies and priorities' ranked highest (1.92) and 'trust between the chair and faculty' ranked lowest (4.87).
Overall, only half of the participants reported having a clear, written process of quantifying faculty workload. The use of workload metrics may be needed for evidence-based decision-making for personnel management and resource allocation.
评估系主任/管理人员如何定义、衡量和评估教师工作量,以更好地了解学院内的实践情况。
通过美国药学院协会联系向系主任/管理人员分发了一份 18 项的调查问卷。参与者确定他们是否是教师工作量的主要决策者,他们的项目是否有工作量政策,工作量如何计算,以及如何衡量教师对工作量公平性的满意度。
在开始调查的 71 名参与者中,来自 52 所学院/学校的 64 名参与者的数据符合分析条件。实践部门的领导报告说,他们的教师平均将 38%的时间用于教学(而非实践部门的 46%),13%用于研究(而非 37%),12%用于服务(而非 16%),36%用于临床实践(而非 0%)。大多数调查参与者(n=57,89%)在有终身教职系统的学校/学院工作,约 24 名参与者报告说,教师工作量指标在不同部门/分部之间存在差异。教学任务和服务据报道可以在教师和主管之间协商,工作量期望差异很大。大多数人表示他们不分析教师对工作量公平性的满意度(n=35),也不分析教师对主管如何分配教师工作量的评价反馈(n=34)。在确定工作量时考虑的 6 个优先事项中,“支持学院/学校的战略和优先事项”排名最高(1.92),“主席和教师之间的信任”排名最低(4.87)。
总体而言,只有一半的参与者报告说有明确的书面量化教师工作量的流程。为了进行基于证据的人事管理和资源分配决策,可能需要使用工作量指标。