pueblo community college · of pcc faculty and 78% of pcc staff respondents agreed that their...

1

Office of

Institutional

Research

Prepared by

Dr. Patricia Diawara, Director

of Institutional Research,

Planning, and Accreditation.

August 2011

Pueblo Community College

2008 and 2010

Colorado Community

College System (CCCS) Climate Surveys

2

2008 and 2010

CCCS Climate Surveys

I. INTRODUCTION

Climate surveys are designed to explore a wide variety of work environment factors that are assumed to

be a major force in influencing employee productivity and satisfaction. In April 2008 and November

2010, all CCCS faculty and staff were invited to complete an online climate survey developed by the

CCCS Human Resources Department. In addition to the traditional demographic questions used to

profile respondents, the CCCS climate surveys included more than 60 question items pertaining to one of

the following areas of interest:

Employee satisfaction and motivation

Institutional leadership and governance

Communication

Relationship with co-workers and supervisors

Workload and resources

Training and professional development

Career advancement opportunities

Performance evaluation system

Salary and benefits

The results from the responding participants provided insight into employees’ perceptions of their

organization and highlighted opportunities for improvement. This report summarizes the findings of the

2008 and 2010 CCCS climate surveys (additional results pertaining to faculty only are presented in

Appendix 1). Throughout this report, PCC’s results that notably differed (plus or minus 5%) from

CCCS’s results are highlighted. The color green was used whenever PCC’s results were at least five

percentage points higher than CCCS’s results (please note that higher does not necessarily mean better).

The color yellow shows question items for which PCC’s results notably fell below CCCS’s results.

II. MAIN FINDINGS

Survey participation: In 2008, 217 PCC employees (65 faculty and 152 APT and classified

employees) responded to the CCCS survey. In 2010, only 143 employees (30 faculty and 103

APT and classified employees) completed the survey. This represents a 34% decrease over 2008.

Overall satisfaction with current employment situation: Between 2008 and 2010, the

percentage of PCC employees who reported being either extremely or very satisfied with their

current employment drastically dropped (from 71% to 56% among faculty and from 68% to 47%

among staff).

3

Job satisfaction and employee motivation: In 2010, more than 95% of PCC respondents

indicated that they liked their job, found the work they do meaningful, and gained a sense of

personal satisfaction and accomplishment from doing their job well.

Institutional leadership and governance: As compared to the entire CCCS population, PCC

employees were much more satisfied with the leadership provided at their college. In 2010, 93%

of PCC faculty and 78% of PCC staff respondents agreed that their college was a well run

organization. Additionally, above 90% of PCC faculty responded that their college valued

academic excellence and placed student success at the top of its priorities.

Communication: In 2010, 85% of PCC faculty and 68% of PCC staff respondents felt that they

received the information they needed from senior management as well as from their direct

supervisor.

Relationships with co-workers: In 2010, 96% of PCC faculty and 85% of PCC staff respondents

responded that they enjoyed working with their colleagues.

Relationships with supervisors: The degree of mutual respect between faculty and their

supervisor was notably higher among PCC respondents than it was among CCCS respondents. In

2010, 89% of PCC faculty and 75% of PCC staff felt that their supervisor treated people fairly.

Workload and resources: As compared to the entire CCCS faculty group, PCC faculty

expressed a higher level of satisfaction with their workload. While 75% of faculty agreed that

their work unity was staffed with the right employees, only 31% agreed that there were enough

employees to get the job done. Among staff, only 61% of respondents indicated that job duties

were distributed fairly in their work unit.

Training: As compared to CCCS, PCC respondents were more satisfied with the training

opportunities provided by their college.

Career advancement opportunities: In 2010, less than 40% of PCC respondents believed that

the college prepared them well for possible advancement opportunities. A minority of respondents

(23% of staff and 43% of faculty) felt that promotions and advancement opportunities were

determined based upon merit.

Performance evaluation system: Approximately 70% of PCC employees responded that the

feedback they received during their most recent evaluation was meaningful and helped them

improve their work.

Salary: Although a minority of PCC respondents (21% of faculty and 34% of staff) felt that their

salary was market competitive, overall PCC respondents were more satisfied than CCCS

respondents with regard to their salary level.

Benefits: In 2010, more than three-quarters of PCC employees expressed their satisfaction with

the college leave policies and retirement benefits. Only 48% of PCC faculty and 58% of PCC

staff believed that the college health benefits compared well with those offered by other

employers in the area.

4

III. RESPONSE RATES

In 2010, a total of 1,194 CCCS APT and classified employees and 496 CCCS faculty responded to the

survey (Table 1). These numbers represent a 48% response rate among CCCS staff and a 44% response

rate among CCCS faculty. The 2008 survey yielded a slightly higher number of respondents, with 1,389

staff and 568 faculty. A total of 143 PCC employees participated in the 2010 survey as compared to 217

in 2008.

Table 1: Number of Respondents by Job Classification

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

Faculty 65 568 30 496

Administrative or Professional/Technical (APT) 66 806 59 721

Classified Staff 86 585 54 473

Total 217 1954 143 1690

As shown in Table 2, the surveys included representation from all of the community colleges, with a

greater number of responses from the largest colleges (FRCC, PPCC, CCD, ACC, RRCC, and PCC). In

2008, PCC respondents accounted for 11% of the total number of respondents. Between 2008 and 2010,

PCC’s participation decreased by one percentage point among staff and by five percentage points among

faculty.

Table 2: Representation Rates

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 % change 2008 2010 % change

Arapahoe Community College (ACC) 13% 6% -7% 8% 6% -2%

Colorado Community College System (CCCS) 0% 0% 0% 9% 9% 0%

Colorado Northwestern Community College (CNCC) 4% 3% -1% 3% 2% -1%

Community College of Aurora (CCA) 3% 5% +2% 4% 5% +1%

Community College of Denver (CCD) 5% 22% +17% 11% 11% 0%

Front Range Community College – Westminster (FRCC) 9% 10% +1% 6% 11% +5%

Front Range Community College – Boulder/Longmont (FRCC) 3% 2% -1% 2% 3% +1%

Front Range Community College – Larimer (FRCC) 8% 9% 1% 5% 7% +2%

Lamar Community College (LCC) 3% 2% -1% 2% 2% 0%

Morgan Community College (MCC) 3% 3% 0% 4% 3% -1%

Northeastern Community College (NJC) 5% 4% -1% 4% 3% -1%

Otero Junior College (OJC) 2% 4% +2% 2% 3% +1%

Pikes Peak Community College (PPCC) 16% 14% -2% 13% 12% -1%

Pueblo Community College (PCC) 11% 6% -5% 11% 10% -1%

Red Rocks Community College (RRCC) 9% 8% -1% 12% 7% -5%

Trinidad State Junior College (TSJC) 6% 3% -3% 5% 5% 0%

5

IV. RESPONDENTS’ DEMOGRAPHICS

Highest level of education: Marked differences were observed between PCC and CCCS in regard to the

highest level of education achieved by the faculty who responded to the surveys (Table 3). In 2010, only

20% of CCCS faculty had a Bachelor’s or Associate’s degree, as compared to 45% among PCC faculty.

Sixty-five percent of CCCS faculty had a Master’s degree, as compared to 52% among PCC faculty. An

overwhelming majority of CCCS APT and classified employees who completed the surveys had attained

additional education beyond high school. Approximately 75% of CCCS staff respondents had obtained

degrees ranging from an Associate’s to a Doctorate degree, with 30% possessing a Master’s degree in

2010. Less than one-fifth of CCCS staff respondents held an Associate’s degree while over one-fourth

held a Bachelor’s degree. The inverse proportion was observed among PCC staff respondents.

Table 3: Highest Level of Education

What is the highest level of education you

have attained? (% of responses)

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

Some High School 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0%

High School Diploma or G.E.D. 0% 0% 0% 0% 6% 4% 5% 4%

Apprenticeship or Training in a Skilled Trade 0% 1% 0% 0% 3% 2% 0% 2%

Some College 0% 2% 3% 1% 21% 17% 15% 16%

Associate’s Degree 14% 5% 24% 6% 23% 19% 26% 17%

Bachelor's Degree 25% 18% 21% 14% 25% 28% 18% 27%

Master's Degree 59% 61% 52% 65% 21% 26% 33% 30%

Doctorate 2% 13% 0% 14% 2% 3% 2% 3%

Gender: Among faculty, approximately two-thirds of survey respondents were female. Among staff

respondents, approximately 70% of the responses came from females (Table 4).

Table 4: Gender

What is your gender? (% of responses)

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


Female 62% 61% 65% 61% 72% 69% 70% 73%

Male 38% 39% 35% 39% 28% 31% 30% 27%

Age group: As shown in Table 5, the largest age groups were 40-49 and 50-59. These two age groups

together totaled at least 60% of the respondents. Additionally, 20% of the PCC faculty who completed

the 2010 survey were aged between 60 and 69 years old, as compared to only 13% among CCCS faculty.

It is also interesting to note that the proportion of employees that indicated being under the age of 30 was

much higher among staff (10%) than it was among faculty (3%).

6

Table 5: Age Groups

What is your age group? (% of responses)

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


Under 30 years 5% 3% 3% 2% 11% 9% 10% 10%

30 - 39 years 13% 17% 17% 18% 19% 18% 16% 20%

40 - 49 years 22% 30% 33% 31% 26% 28% 30% 26%

50 - 59 years 57% 37% 27% 35% 33% 35% 34% 32%

60 - 69 years 13% 13% 20% 13% 11% 9% 10% 11%

70 + years 2% 0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 0% 1%

Ethnicity: In 2010, 84% of CCCS faculty and 77% of CCCS staff who responded to the survey

identified themselves as White/Caucasian (Table 6). The ethnic composition of PCC’s respondents

markedly differed from that of the entire CCCS population. Indeed, PCC’s proportion of Hispanic/Latino

respondents was at least ten percentage points higher than that observed for the whole CCCS population.

Inversely, PCC showed a lower percentage of White/Caucasian respondents.

Table 6: Ethnic Composition

What is your ethnicity? (% of responses)

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


American Indian/Alaskan Native 0% 1% 0% 0% 2% 1% 3% 1%

Asian 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 2% 0% 1%

Black/African American 0% 1% 0% 1% 1% 3% 1% 3%

Hispanic/Latino 16% 5% 23% 4% 34% 14% 25% 12%

Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0%

White/Caucasian 81% 90% 63% 84% 60% 77% 64% 78%

Two or more races 0% 0% 7% 4% 0% 0% 5% 4%

Other 3% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 3% 1%

Length of employment: In 2010, 61% of CCCS faculty who participated in the survey had been working

for their current employer for less than ten years (Table 7). At PCC, the faculty’s length of employment

was nearly evenly split between those who had been working at the college for less than ten years (47%)

and those who were hired more than ten years ago (53%). Approximately 65% of PCC and CCCS staff

respondents had been employed at their current institution for less than ten years.

7

Table 7: Length of Employment

How long have you worked at this institution? (% of responses)

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


Less than 2 years 17% 14% 17% 13% 23% 23% 17% 19%

2-4 years 12% 18% 13% 17% 16% 17% 28% 27%

5-9 years 20% 30% 17% 31% 25% 24% 20% 21%

10-14 years 17% 17% 13% 18% 18% 16% 20% 16%

15-19 years 19% 12% 33% 12% 11% 11% 11% 9%

20-24 years 10% 6% 7% 6% 4% 5% 4% 6%

25-29 years 5% 3% 0% 2% 3% 2% 1% 1%

30 + years 0% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1% 0% 1%

Discipline (faculty only): As shown in Table 8, at the System level, the disciplines were split almost half

between general education (46%) and career and technical education (CTE) (54%). At PCC, a large

majority of faculty who responded to the survey (80%) were from CTE disciplines (2010 data).

Table 8: Discipline

Please indicate which discipline you teach (% of responses)

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

Career and Technical Education (CTE) 75% 48% 80% 46%

General Education 25% 52% 20% 54%

Contract term and salary (faculty only): As indicated in Table 9, most respondents (60% to 70%) were

9-month-salaried, followed by 12-month-salaried (17% to 20%) and 10-month-salaried (4% to 19%). In

2008, 81% of the faculty (CCCS and PCC) who participated in the survey reported earning between

$35,000 and $54,999 (Table 10). In 2010, only 74% of CCCS faculty and 67% of PCC faculty fell within

this salary range.

Table 9: Contract Term

What is your contract term? (% of responses) 2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

Less than 9 Month 2% 2% 0% 3%

9 Month Standard Academic Year 60% 70% 70% 69%

10 Month 19% 5% 10% 4%

11 Month 0% 1% 3% 2%

12 Month 19% 20% 17% 18%

Other (please specify) 2% 2% 0% 4%

8

Table 10: Salary

What is your current base (contract) salary? (% of responses)

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

$20,000 - $29,000 6% 5% 10% 9%

$30,000 - $34,999 3% 7% 7% 6%

$35,000 - $39,999 17% 21% 10% 17%

$40,000 - $44,999 22% 26% 30% 24%

$45,000 - $49,999 25% 20% 13% 19%

$50,000 - $54,999 17% 14% 13% 15%

$55,000 - $59,999 9% 5% 10% 5%

$60,000 - $64,999 2% 2% 3% 4%

$65,000 - $69,999 0% 1% 3% 1%

$70,000 or over 0% 1% 0% 1%

V. SURVEY RESULTS

Overall satisfaction with current employment situation: Table 11 shows that between 2008 and 2010,

the percentage of faculty who reported being either extremely or very satisfied with their current

employment drastically dropped (from 61% to 42% among CCCS faculty and from 71% to 56% among

PCC faculty). This observation was even more pronounced among APT and classified staff. Indeed,

nearly 70% of staff respondents reported being either extremely or very satisfied with their current

employment in 2008, as compared to approximately 45% in 2010. Between 2008 and 2010, the

percentage of “extremely dissatisfied” respondents increased by at least 10 percentage points among both

faculty and staff.

Table 11: Overall Satisfaction with Current Employment Situation

Overall, how satisfied are you with your current employment situation? (% of responses)

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


Extremely Satisfied 24% 16% 15% 12% 12% 16% 14% 12%

Very Satisfied 47% 45% 41% 30% 56% 51% 33% 31%

Somewhat Satisfied 28% 35% 33% 34% 30% 28% 31% 33%

Extremely Dissatisfied 2% 5% 12% 18% 3% 5% 19% 18%

Table 12 lists 11 “satisfaction factors” and the percentage of respondents who rated them as “very

important” or “important.” Among the factors that contributed the most to personal job satisfaction were

the ability to perform meaningful work, good relationships with coworkers, good working conditions, the

appreciation of opinions/suggestions, job security, salary, and effective leadership and supervision.

Benefits and training/professional development opportunities were also considered as important

satisfaction factors by most of the respondents. The “least” important satisfaction factors were career

advancement opportunities and recognition. Notable differences between CCCS and PCC were observed

among faculty. The results of the 2010 survey showed that, as compared to the entire CCCS faculty

population, PCC faculty more frequently cited job security, pay, benefits, and leadership/supervision as

9

important contributors to job satisfaction. In contrast, training/professional development was “only” cited

by 78% of PCC faculty as compared to 83 % of CCCS faculty.

Table 12: Satisfaction factors

% of Very Important and Important

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


Ability to Perform Meaningful Work 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 99%

Relationships with Coworkers 95% 95% 93% 94% 95% 94% 96% 93%

Working Conditions 98% 97% 100% 97% 98% 97% 95% 96%

Opinions/Suggestions are Valued 98% 94% 93% 94% 95% 97% 96% 96%

Job Security 91% 89% 100% 95% 97% 94% 96% 95%

Pay 91% 87% 93% 88% 97% 98% 97% 96%

Leadership/Supervision 93% 89% 93% 84% 95% 94% 95% 94%

Benefits 90% 83% 89% 78% 95% 93% 93% 92%

Training/Professional Development 98% 87% 78% 83% 92% 90% 87% 88%

Career Advancement Opportunities 79% 67% 63% 67% 88% 85% 83% 84%

Employee Recognition 77% 65% 70% 66% 73% 75% 75% 76%

The CCCS climate surveys asked participants who were planning to leave their current position to

indicate what factors influenced their decision (Table 13). Among faculty, the most frequently cited

reason was pay and benefits. In 2010, 68% of CCCS faculty and 50% of PCC faculty indicated that

dissatisfaction with salary and benefits could lead to their resignation. A significant percentage of faculty

respondents (26% among CCCS and 50% among PCC) indicated that “other” circumstances could

influence their decision to leave their current employment. Among staff, the lack of advancement

opportunities emerged as the primary reason for quitting. Dissatisfaction with pay and benefits and

working conditions were also frequently cited. Results also showed that conflict with supervisor and/or

co-workers significantly influenced PCC staff and faculty to consider leaving the college.

Table 13: Reasons for Leaving

If you are planning to leave your current employment, please indicate the reason(s) why (% of responses).

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


Pay and Benefits 32% 49% 50% 68% 37% 38% 46% 49%

Working Conditions 20% 27% 17% 30% 18% 20% 46% 37%

Conflict with Supervisor 4% 10% 17% 16% 18% 14% 33% 19%

Conflict with Co-workers 4% 5% 17% 5% 8% 6% 21% 12%

Dissatisfaction with Job Duties 8% 22% 0% 23% 12% 18% 17% 27%

Lack of Advancement ( added in the 2010 survey)

0% 25%

50% 54%

Career Change 4% 15% 0% 11% 14% 18% 13% 16%

Moving or Relocation 12% 9% 17% 3% 8% 11% 8% 6%

Other 44% 37% 50% 26% 41% 40% 8% 29%

10

Job satisfaction and employee motivation: Although almost 20% of CCCS respondents (2010 survey)

reported being dissatisfied with their current employment satisfaction, the results showed that more than

95% of them liked their jobs, found the work they do meaningful, and gained a sense of personal

satisfaction and accomplishment from doing their job well (Table 14). Approximately 90% of the

respondents felt motivated to do a good job while approximately 80% of faculty and 70% of staff felt that

their coworkers were motivated to do a good job. Almost all faculty respondents indicated being satisfied

with the types of courses they taught and with the level of independence they had in teaching their

classes. An overwhelming majority (above 85%) of respondents (both faculty and staff) reported that

their work is sufficiently challenging and a source of pride. Although employees seemed to be highly

satisfied with their profession, the responses indicated a near split when asked if they ever felt “burnt

out”. In 2010, approximately 70% PCC respondents reported that they rarely thought about quitting, as

compared to 63% among the entire System.

Table 14: Job Satisfaction and Employee Motivation

% of Strongly Agree and Agree

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


Overall, I like the work I do. 98% 99% 100% 99% 97% 96% 96% 95%

The work I do is meaningful. 97% 100% 100% 100% 99% 98% 97% 96%

Doing my job well gives me a sense of personal satisfaction and accomplishment.

98% 99% 100% 99% 99% 97% 98% 97%

I feel motivated to do a good job. 92% 91% 89% 90% 90% 88% 89% 87%

I feel that my coworkers are motivated to do a good job.

80% 77% 82% 79% 70% 72% 67% 72%

My work is sufficiently challenging for me. 92% 96% 100% 98% 92% 89% 88% 87%

I am proud to tell others that I work for this college.

93% 86% 96% 87% 87% 85% 89% 86%

I seldom feel 'burnt out' by my job. 52% 48% 48% 53% 49% 54% 50% 51%

I rarely think about quitting. 63% 32% 73% 63% 63% 63% 70% 63%

I am satisfied with the types of courses I am assigned to teach.

98% 95% 100% 95%

I am satisfied with the level of independence that I have in how I teach my class.

98% 97% 96% 95%

Institutional leadership and governance: As compared to the entire CCCS population, PCC faculty and

staff respondents were much more satisfied with the leadership provided at their college (Table 15). In

2010, 93% of PCC faculty and 78% of PCC staff respondents agreed that overall, their college was a well

run organization. A large majority (above 85%) of PCC faculty and staff thought that their college was

achieving its mission, vision, and goals. Most PCC employees indicated that they knew how to “do their

part” in helping the college fulfill its mission and agreed that their college had a good reputation in the

community.

11

Table 15: Mission, Vision, and Goals


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


Overall, I believe that my college is a well-run organization.

68% 60% 93% 64% 71% 67% 78% 71%

I know the mission, vision and goals that have been set by my college.

93% 91% 88% 86% 85% 84% 95% 86%

I believe that the college is achieving its mission, vision and goals.

70% 67% 85% 71% 68% 68% 85% 74%

I understand how to do my part in helping the college to achieve its mission, vision and goals.

84% 84% 93% 84% 78% 85% 93% 86%

My college has a good reputation in the community.

89% 84% 96% 83% 85% 79% 89% 82%

I have trust and confidence in the leadership of the college.

59% 54% 82% 59% 65% 63% 69% 66%

My college is headed in the right direction. 60% 62% 89% 65% 69% 68% 75% 71%

The CCCS surveys included five question items related to institutional values and culture (Table 16).

Important differences were observed between PCC faculty and CCCS faculty. In 2010, over three-

quarters of PCC faculty indicated that the college cared about its employees and treated them well and

fairly, as compared to approximately two-thirds among CCCS faculty. Above 90% of PCC faculty

responded that their college valued academic excellence and placed student success at the top of its

priorities. The questions “I feel the college cares about its employees” and “employees at this college are

treated well and fairly” received lower marks among staff respondents, with a level of agreement inferior

to 70%. In 2010, 64% of PCC faculty and 67% of PCC staff indicated that the culture and policies of the

college supported a healthy work/life balance.

Table 16: Values and Culture


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


I feel that the college cares about its employees.

69% 65% 85% 65% 59% 62% 69% 65%

Employees at this college are treated well and fairly.

70% 61% 78% 60% 56% 60% 64% 61%

The culture and policies of the college support a healthy work/life balance.

48% 47% 64% 51% 60% 60% 67% 61%

My college values academic excellence. 75% 81% 93% 82%

Students are and student success is a top priority at my college.

87% 81% 96% 84%

12

As showed in Table 17, a large majority of faculty (above 80%) agreed that they had a voice in the

decision making within their department, felt encouraged to find new and better ways to do their job, and

were given an opportunity to participate in the recruiting of new faculty. The results clearly showed a

higher satisfaction level among PCC faculty as compared to the entire CCCS faculty group. In 2010,

approximately 69% of staff respondents agreed that their opinion seemed to count, while 88% felt

encouraged to participate in the continuous improvement of their college.

Table 17: Shared Governance


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


My opinion at work seems to count. 68% 68% 75% 66% 69% 72% 67% 69%

I feel encouraged to find new and better ways of doing my job and improving processes.

77% 79% 86% 80% 89% 82% 88% 80%

I have a voice in decision making within my department.

87% 87% 96% 83%

I have opportunity to participate in search and selection processes for new faculty.

82% 80% 81% 80%

Communication: In 2010, a majority of PCC faculty and staff who completed the survey (above 85%

and 68 %, respectively) felt that they received the information they needed from senior management as

well as their direct supervisor (Table 18). Almost 70% of PCC faculty agreed that two-way

communication between faculty and administrators was good, as compared to 59% among CCCS.

Table 18: Communication


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


I feel like I know what is going on at the college. 59% 60% 75% 66% 60% 64% 68% 65%

I get the kind of information that I need from senior management.

62% 58% 75% 62% 64% 62% 73% 65%

My supervisor keeps me informed about issues that affect me.

85% 78% 82% 81% 81% 77% 79% 77%

At my college, two-way communication between faculty and administrators is good.

60% 55% 68% 59%

Relationships with co-workers and supervisors: Table 19 shows that a large percentage (above 70%)

of faculty and staff felt that they worked in an environment that supports teamwork. An even larger

percentage of respondents (above 80%) indicated that people in their work unit cooperated with one

another. In 2010, 85% of PCC staff and 96% of PCC faculty responded that they enjoyed working with

their colleagues. Ninety-six percent of PCC faculty respondents indicated that faculty respected one

another.

13

Table 19: Relationships with Co-Workers


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


I work in an environment that supports team work.

77% 71% 85% 71% 80% 74% 76% 73%

People in my work unit cooperate with one another.

89% 84% 93% 83% 80% 83% 78% 82%

I enjoy working with my colleagues. 97% 94% 96% 93% 91% 92% 85% 91%

At my college, faculty respects one another. 94% 87% 96% 89%

As shown in Table 20, a large majority (above 80%) of respondents felt that they are treated respectfully

by their supervisor and consequently expressed that they respected their supervisor. Both the 2008 and

the 2010 results revealed that the degree of mutual respect between faculty and their supervisor was

notably higher at PCC than it was among the entire CCCS faculty population. As compared to CCCS,

PCC faculty respondents were more satisfied with the level of support they received from their Dean (10

percentage point difference). In 2010, 89% of PCC faculty respondents and 75% of PCC staff

respondents indicated that their supervisor treated people fairly.

Table 20: Relationships with Supervisors


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


I respect my supervisor. 92% 87% 89% 83% 85% 85% 82% 85%

My supervisor shows respect to his/her staff. 91% 86% 93% 83% 86% 83% 81% 83%

My supervisor treats people fairly. 87% 84% 89% 79% 79% 79% 75% 80%

I get the support I need from my Dean. 92% 79% 89% 78%

I get the support I need from my Department Chair.

78% 81% 80% 80%

Workload and resources: Results from the 2010 survey showed that, as compared to the entire CCCS

faculty group, a larger percentage of PCC faculty responded that their duties and responsibilities were

clear (89%), they had the tools and resources needed to do their job well (86%), their teaching load and

administrative responsibilities were reasonable (82% and 75% respectively), the full-time/part-time

faculty ratio was appropriate (52%), and resources were equitably distributed among faculty (79%)

(Table 21). Although most of the faculty agreed that their work unit was staffed with the right employees

(75%), a minority (31%) agreed that there are enough employees to get the job done. Among staff

members, 65% of CCCS employees and only 58% of PCC employees expressed that their workload was

reasonable. Only 61% of PCC staff members agreed that job duties were distributed fairly in their work

unit, as compared to 67% among CCCS staff members.

14

Additionally, over three-quarters of PCC faculty respondents indicated that their college was either “very

effective” or “effective” in providing the classroom and office technology they needed (Table 22). The

college’s effectiveness in providing administrative support received a lower mark, with only 61% of PCC

faculty selecting “very effective” or “effective.”

Table 21: Workload and Resources


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


My job duties and priorities are clear. 74% 76% 89% 79% 81% 82% 83% 80%

I have the tools and resources I need to do my job well.

69% 63% 86% 70% 68% 68% 80% 72%

In my work unit, we have the right people to do the work.

73% 70% 75% 71% 73% 71% 67% 71%

In my work unit, we have enough people to get the work done.

32% 34% 31% 45% 39% 45% 44% 45%

My workload is reasonable. 56% 52% 61% 58% 62% 67% 58% 65%

Duties are distributed fairly in my work unit. 77% 61% 74% 64% 64% 66% 61% 67%

My teaching load is reasonable. 77% 66% 82% 76%

Teaching loads are equitably distributed among faculty.

78% 56% 64% 63%

My administrative responsibilities are reasonable.

65% 65% 75% 66%

The full-time/part-time faculty ratio in my academic area is appropriate.

38% 34% 52% 38%

There is an equitable distribution of resources among faculty in my college.

73% 56% 79% 60%

Table 22: Administrative and technological support

How effective is your college in providing the

following for faculty? (% of Very Effective and

Effective)

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


Administrative Support 52% 54% 61% 58%

Classroom Technology 73% 63% 82% 71%

Office Technology 68% 59% 76% 62%

Training and professional development: As compared to CCCS, PCC respondents were more satisfied

with the training opportunities provided by their college (Table 23a). As shown in Table 23b, PCC

faculty specifically acknowledged the college’s effectiveness in providing orientations, mentoring, and

professional development opportunities.

15

Table 23a: Training and professional development


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


My college gives me the training I need to do my job well.

72% 65% 80% 69% 70% 66% 75% 65%

My college provides adequate training and support for part-time, adjunct faculty.

48% 38% 64% 49%

Table 23b: Training and professional development

How effective is your college in providing the

following for faculty? (% of Very Effective and

Effective)

FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


Orientations 60% 47% 75% 55%

Mentoring 86% 48% 82% 42%

Professional Development 57% 58% 75% 54%

Career advancement opportunities: A minority of CCCS employees responded that their institution

offered good career advancement opportunities (Table 24). At PCC, only 36% of faculty and 30% of staff

(2010 data) felt optimistic about future opportunities at the college. Less than 40% of PCC respondents

believed that the college prepared them well for possible advancement opportunities. The results also

revealed a system-wide concern regarding the perceived fairness of the career advancement process.

Indeed, a majority of respondents (particularly among staff) felt that promotions and advancement

opportunities were not directly related to successful job performance.

Table 24: Career Advancement Opportunities


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


I feel I have good career advancement opportunities at my college.

47% 45% 36% 43% 38% 40% 30% 36%

The college does a good job of developing employees for job opportunities and advancement in the organization.

50% 37% 39% 36% 31% 34% 38% 34%

At my college, employees that work hard and do a good job will have opportunities for promotions and advancement.

48% 38% 44% 38% 38% 37% 33% 32%

Promotions in my department and college are determined based upon merit.

48% 35% 43% 37% 19% 31% 23% 28%

16

Performance evaluation system: Approximately 70% of the survey participants responded that the

feedback they received during their most recent evaluation was meaningful and helped them improve

their work (Table 25). A large majority (above 80%) of respondents agreed that their most recent

performance evaluation was fair. However, only 35% of CCCS faculty and 50% of PCC faculty agreed

that the performance evaluation system and pay-for-performance was applied fairly.

Table 25: Performance Evaluation


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


The feedback I received during my most recent performance evaluation was meaningful and has helped me to improve my work.

75% 73% 75% 71% 73% 68% 71% 67%

My most recent performance evaluation was fair.

87% 86% 86% 84% 77% 77% 86% 81%

I am satisfied that my college's faculty performance evaluation system and pay-for-performance process is fairly applied.

52% 40% 50% 35%

Salary and benefits: As shown in Table 26, most of the question items pertaining to salary received less

than 50% of favorable answers (i.e. strongly agree or agree). In 2010, only 21% of PCC faculty and 34%

of PCC staff felt that their salary was market competitive as compared to other organizations in the same

geographical area. However, as compared to the entire CCCS group, PCC employees better understood

how pay rates were determined, felt more satisfied with their salary level, and believed that pay policies

were administered fairly. Approximately 70% of PCC respondents believed that pay increase should be

based primarily on job performance (30% believed that pay increase should be based primarily on length

of service).

With regard to benefits, the highest percentage of favorable answers was obtained in the areas of leave

and retirement (Table 27). In 2010, 79% of PCC faculty and 83% of PCC staff believed that the leave

policies compared well with those offered by other employers in the area. More than 75% of PCC

employees believed that their retirement benefits were market competitive. However, 43% of PCC

faculty and 38% of PCC staff members were concerned about whether or not they would have enough

money to maintain their current standard of living when they retire. In 2010, about half of the PCC

respondents felt that their health benefits did not compare favorably with other employers. Only half of

PCC respondents indicated that their individual monetary contribution was reasonable.

17

Table 26: Salary


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


I believe that my salary is market competitive

compared to other employers in the area that I

could work for doing similar work.

20% 13% 21% 17% 35% 33% 34% 34%

I understand how pay rates are determined. 61% 46% 50% 44% 60% 56% 65% 58%

I am appropriately paid for the work I do at my

college. 33% 24% 32% 20% 43% 46% 49% 43%

I believe that our college/system pay policies are

administered fairly. 46% 28% 50% 31% 41% 41% 50% 41%

I am appropriately paid compared with others

doing similar work, with similar levels of

education and experience at my college.

46% 41% 44% 38% 41% 43% 38% 40%

My salary reflects my performance and

contribution to the college. 34% 25% 33% 19% 37% 40% 37% 36%

I believe that pay increases should be based

primarily on performance. 64% 64% 68% 72% 64% 71% 73% 75%

I believe that pay increases should be based

primarily on length of service. 26% 43% 29% 38% 28% 27% 28% 26%

Table 27: Benefits


FACULTY STAFF

2008 2010 2008 2010


I believe our leave policies (vacation, sick leave,

etc.) compare well with those offered by other


75% 70% 79% 69% 82% 84% 83% 84%

I believe our retirement benefits compare well

with those offered by other employers in the

area.

90% 74% 78% 67% 76% 77% 77% 71%

Our retirement benefits give my confidence that I

will have enough money when I retire to maintain

my current standard of living.

53% 41% 43% 30% 49% 47% 38% 37%

I believe our health benefits (medical, dental,

vision) compare well with those offered by other


38% 40% 48% 52% 30% 41% 54% 60%

The amount of money that I must contribute

toward the cost of my benefits is reasonable. 45% 44% 54% 46% 37% 51% 51% 57%

18

VI. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Climate surveys are valuable tools for identifying areas of employee satisfaction and dissatisfaction.

They give employees a voice in the determination of organizational strengths and opportunities for

improvement. By acting on performance barriers identified by employees of all levels, organizations can

develop strategies and implement action plans that will create a greater workplace and increase

productivity.

The campus climate survey developed by CCCS provides a source of comparative data that can help PCC

better interpret its own results and set benchmarks for future surveys. The availability of system-wide

data represents a significant advantage over the locally-developed climate survey administered on all four

PCC campuses in fall 2009.

PCC needs to encourage participation in the bi-annual CCCS climate surveys. Low response rates

damage the credibility of a survey's results and limit the number of statistical analyses that can be

performed to extract meaningful information from the data. Inversely, when a survey yields a high

response rate, results are more likely to represent the overall target population and the findings are

statistically more accurate.

The IR Office recommends that PCC takes several steps to increase the response rate of the next CCCS

survey. These include i) effectively communicate the importance of this survey to all employees, ii)

report the results back to all employees in a timely manner, and iii) use the survey results to develop and

implement improvement initiatives that will increase employee satisfaction and productivity.

19

Appendix 1 – Additional Faculty Survey Results

On average, how may hours per week do you spend on classroom teaching? (% of responses)

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

5-9 hours 18% 13% 15% 18%

10-14 hours 21% 23% 44% 27%

15-20 hours 43% 40% 30% 33%

More than 20 hours 18% 24% 11% 22%

How many total credit hours did you teach in the past academic year? (include fall, spring, summer and overloads) (% of responses)

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

0-18 hours 16% 15% 18% 22%

19-24 hours 16% 12% 14% 13%

25-30 28% 20% 18% 17%

31-35 16% 19% 18% 15%

36-40 16% 20% 25% 18%

41 or more hours 7% 15% 7% 15%

On average, how many hours per week do you spend on committee work? (% of responses)

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

1-3 hours 64% 56% 61% 61%

4-6 hours 14% 24% 18% 18%

7-9 hours 3% 5% 4% 5%

10 or more hours 2% 3% 4% 2%

None 18% 12% 14% 15%

On average, how many hours per week do you spend on instructional preparation/planning? (% of responses)

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

1-4 hours 3% 5% 11% 10%

5-9 hours 36% 33% 30% 34%

10-14 hours 42% 31% 22% 30%

15 or more hours 19% 30% 37% 27%

20

On average, how many hours per week do you spend outside of the classroom working with student activities/clubs? (% of responses)

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

1-3 hours 70% 77% 84% 83%

4-6 hours 21% 14% 0% 10%

7-9 hours 4% 3% 5% 3%

10 or more hours 5% 5% 11% 5%

On average, how many hours per week do you spend outside of the classroom on student advising/counseling office hours? (% of responses)

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

1-3 hours 18% 22% 39% 30%

4-6 hours 33% 36% 21% 36%

7-9 hours 21% 19% 7% 14%

10 or more hours 29% 23% 32% 20%

On average, how many hours per week do you spend on student grading/assessment? (% of responses)

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

1-4 hours 32% 23% 21% 19%

5-9 hours 48% 40% 43% 40%

10-14 hours 15% 23% 25% 25%

15 or more hours 5% 14% 11% 16%

On average, how many hours per week do you spend supervising/mentoring adjunct faculty? (% of responses)

2008 2010

PCC CCCS PCC CCCS

1-3 hours 49% 49% 48% 46%

4-6 hours 24% 21% 16% 18%

7-9 hours 3% 4% 8% 4%

10 or more hours 3% 4% 8% 7%

None 21% 23% 20% 26%

pueblo community college · of pcc faculty and 78% of pcc staff respondents agreed that their...

Documents