Retention of Quality Professors:

Key to a Successful Liberal Arts Education?

The Truman State University’s Chapter of the American Association

of University Professors (AAUP) conducted a study during the fall

semester of 1999 of faculty members who have left the institution

over the past five years. The study indicates that faculty retention

is a serious problem for Truman State University. While the University’s

administration concerns itself with student retention and improvement

of the physical plant, it has done little to address faculty attrition

issues. Arguably, quality professors are the heart of a successful

liberal arts education. The AAUP would like to encourage Truman’s

administrators to implement policy changes which would address

this issue in order to build a stronger institution that will

attract and retain talented faculty members.

AAUP has identified about 200 faculty members who have left

Truman State University over the past five years. Slightly over

half of these departees were faculty on temporary, non-tenure

track contracts. For the most part, this study excludes temporary

workers except perhaps to note that due to their transitory nature

they are probably undercounted and to advise a study on the ramifications

of using temporary and part-time labor in an academic setting.

Also not included are departed staff which would also warrant

an independent study.

Of the remaining departed faculty members, 31 retired (it is

telling that many of these people took early retirement and then

moved onto gainful employment elsewhere), 8 were either denied

tenure or fired, and 48 (almost a quarter) resigned their position

at Truman, usually to pursue gainful employment elsewhere. This

study focuses primarily on this last group of people.

Aggregate figures for departing faculty, 1995-1999
Division	Tenured	Tenure Track	Temporary	Total
Bus. & Acc.	4 (all retired)	2	2	8
Education	1 (retired)	1	3	5
Fine Arts	5 (3 retired)	6	24	35
HPP	5 (all retired)	7	3	15
Lang. & Lit.	11 (6 retired)	12	29	52
Math & CS	3 (2 retired)	5	13	21
Science	9 (6 retired)	5	18	32
Social Science	5 (4 retired)	7	16	28
Total	43 (31 retired)	45	108	196

 

Faculty attrition has a variety of costs and negative consequences

for an institution. These include the following:

• financial costs associated with rehiring faculty positions,

  including the expense of travel and interviewing, faculty and

  administrative time spent on searches, productivity loss for

  faculty and administrative members involved in the search, and

  start-up costs;

• impact on students, including a lack of continuity in relationships

  built up through classes and advising and difficulties for students

  securing letters of recommendation for jobs and graduate school

  from faculty who have departed;

• hindrance of building friendships and a sense of cohesion

  in developing a liberal arts mission;

• deterioration of morale among remaining faculty members when

  they see bright, capable, and congenial colleagues depart.

A common perception at Truman is that faculty members left

for greener pastures only to understand in retrospect the benefits

of being at Truman. If this is the case, that sentiment does not

appear in our survey. Almost universally faculty members stated

that leaving was the right decision or the best decision they

made. The concerns of those who expressed hesitation about leaving

revolved around issues of leaving the security of a tenured or

tenure-track position and perhaps even taking a pay cut to assume

a job elsewhere.

Nevertheless, many departed faculty members were able to identify

a variety of positive attributes at this institution. These should

be noted, and perhaps there are ways we can improve on these elements

so that Truman becomes more attractive and faculty will want to

come and stay here:

• excellent caliber of students; their “zeal to learn.”

  One person noted “I miss the students. (I still think of

  them as MY students; I miss MY students.)”;

• wonderful, congenial colleagues;
• convenience, ease, and safety of maneuvering around a small

  campus and town; free parking;

• travel support for conferences and meetings;
• summer research grants;
• academic freedom in the classroom.

Truman’s administration dismisses faculties’ reasons for departure

as a result of Kirksville’s isolated location, a factor about

which they can do nothing. This reasoning discourages the University

from addressing what it can correct. Surprisingly few people identified

geographic isolation in and of itself as a reason for leaving.

In fact, some former faculty members recognize and appreciate

the benefits of living in a small rural town. It would be a mistake

to scapegoat the Kirksville community on this issue. The University

needs to take responsibility for its role and actions.

Few people identified a singular reason for leaving. More common

were a multiplicity of motivations, some of them related to geography

and others related to administration policy or related factors.

Following are common reasons people gave for leaving as well as

policy suggestions the administration could adopt to mitigate

these factors:

* No work for spouse. Truman recognizes that there are few

options for trailing spouses/partners (many of whom are career-oriented)

in the Kirksville area, but is reluctant to implement any policies

to mitigate this concern. One person noted that “some universities

(University of Nebraska-Lincoln comes to mind) advertise in their

job listings that they support dual-career couples.” The

University needs to be more flexible in providing joint or shared

appointments to dual-career families. Specifically, Truman needs

to implement an aggressive partner assistance program which will

aid faculty and staff spouses in hiring for campus positions,

provide contacts with area businesses for professional advancement,

and assist spouses with career counseling to facilitate exploration

of employment options. “Just having a mechanism in place

to provide help,” another person noted, “would improve

morale even if people did not actually find jobs.”

* Lack of family medical benefits. Many people criticized the

high deductibles of the University’s medical insurance and the

University’s inability to extend this coverage to family members

at an affordable cost. One person criticized the University for

failing to hire a benefits coordinator who would be an advocate

for faculty interests. “The self-insured thing just does

not work,” was one person’s assessment. “Abysmal”

is how another person described the health insurance Truman offers

faculty.

* Low pay. Low salaries together with high medical costs, one

person noted, “makes it almost impossible for your family

to get by. Yes, the cost of living in Kirksville is low, but not

that low.” Others advocated negotiating packages with faculty,

paying market rates, or the institution of a merit pay system.

“Do more to mitigate the geographic isolation of Kville,”

another person noted. “Pay faculty more so that they can

afford to get out of town more often.”

* Lack of research support. Several people commented on Truman’s

willingness to dedicate a variety of resources (photocopies, conference

travel, summer research fellowships, etc.) to support faculty

research. Unfortunately, other departed faculty did not feel that

this extended to appreciation for and valuation of their research

agendas. Truman remains primarily a teaching institution, and

the administration does not understand the role that research

plays in fostering a rigorous and stimulating atmosphere for teaching

at a liberal arts institution. Lack of research plays out most

visibly among the people who were hired ABD but were unable to

finish their dissertations before tenure review (the most common

reason for denial of tenure). Truman needs to foster an environment

which will encourage excellence in faculty research.

* Sabbatical and leave policy. Improving the faculty leave

policy, granting junior sabbaticals, and ensuring regular sabbaticals

for tenured faculty would lead to a strong and more dedicated

faculty. “Allow faculty to develop as teachers or as researchers

(or both!), and award them (with relief/release time, schedule

adjustment, more regular leave time),” one person advocated.

“Sabbaticals are an absolute must,” another person observed.

“Junior sabbaticals for non-tenured faculty help them achieve

their research goals prior to tenure review . . . the market demands

it if we are going to recruit high quality faculty.”

* Teaching load. Although Truman is moving toward four-four equivalency
(which recognizes time dedicated to research and
service), more need to be done in terms of better teaching configurations,

fewer class preparations, and release time to pursue professional

and scholarly activities and to avoid burnout. “The market

demands it,” a person noted. “People can keep up in

their fields and do innovative teaching and do real research of

higher quality if they carry a lower course load.”

* Service load. “Reduce the ridiculously high service

load,” one person noted, “through better institutional

planning.” Another advocated granting rewards for service.

* Personality issues. At any institution a certain number of

people will leave because of a variety of personal issues. Naturally

many temporary and part-time employees left because of the lack

of security of a tenure-track line, and others will leave because

of not being promoted to division head or other administrative

position. More serious, however, are people who leave because

of issues of gender or sexual orientation discrimination. One

person stated that there were “extremely hostile” reactions

to initiatives to address such concerns. Another person observed

that “the conservative Christian attitudes of the students,

faculty, administrators, and the people of Kirksville was a poor

match for my liberal, agnostic beliefs.” Being welcoming

and supportive of people with diverse views is part of what makes

a liberal arts institution unique, and Truman should embrace rather

than marginalize such endeavors. “Truman could probably be

more nurturing of new faculty,” one person noted. “The

absence of collegiality was unsettling.”

* Administration’s attitude toward faculty. Several people

shared sentiments such as experiencing “considerable frustrations

I had with the way TSU was being lead and managed.” and noting

that “the administration was directing the University toward

mediocrity.” Another person stated “It is a real shame

that Truman’s administration has a history of exploiting their

teaching staff and refusing to listen to the concerns and needs

of those who provide direct service and instruction to students.”

People must be rewarded for their good work. Specific suggestions

to address these problems included rotating Division Heads every

3 to 5 years, hire more women, stop the nepotism, and hire more

administrators from outside in order to “replace over time

the good old boy and girl network that has run that place since

Charles McClain.” One person advocated that Truman “select

individuals from outside the institution to fit critical administrative

positions. Their experience may boost Truman even more!”

One person noted that the administration’s lack of concern for

the faculty was reflected in the lack of an exit interview for

departing personnel. Apparently within the last year the administration

has begun to conduct such interviews, and we applaud and encourage

this initiative.

* Lack of computer support. Fortunately the administration

has recognized the seriousness of this problem, and we eagerly

await to see if they are able to solve this problem.

* Retirement benefits. Faculty should be allowed to replace

MOSER with a more lucrative and portable TIAA-CREF plan.

* Lack of social opportunities for family. “Because Kirksville

has so little to offer to a family,” one person noted, “the

University should be more pro-active in supporting family life.”

Specific suggestions include cooperatives to improve K-12 education

in the area, children-oriented programs and activities, and expansion

of the Lyceum series. In addition, Truman could facilitate incorporation

of spouses/partners and dependents into the campus community through

extension of faculty privileges such as free access to recreation

and library facilities. “The administration should at least

appear concerned about people’s families,” one person concluded.

“Watch for burnout and provide lots of community grounding,”

another noted, “otherwise, it is only natural for young,

promising careers to move.”

One person concluded that “I’m proud to have taught there.

And I’m not at all sorry I left.” Another advocated “Take

a few lessons from the corporate world: realize if you want to

keep good people in a less-then-optimal social environment, you’ve

got to bend over backwards with benefits and recognition for good

work.” We ask the administration to be more flexible and

address these issues so that more faculty members are proud to

teach here and are proud to stay.

Truman State AAUP Chapter

Truman State University

December 1999