Faculty Compensation and "Brain Drain"

State budget cuts are taking their toll on California's public university system, as reported in the Los Angeles Times last week. Of particular concern to the University of California, whose campuses include world-renowned institutions such as UCLA and Berkeley, is the migration of talented faculty to private universities that offer better pay and benefits.

One of the issues noted in the "Postsecondary Education in the 21st Century" report is that of money--or lack thereof. Survey respondents ranked difficulty financing education as the top barrier facing postsecondary students. But money also has an impact on higher education institutions. As public universities such as the University of California face "brain drain" due to budget cuts, it's worth revisiting some of the ideal college faculty characteristics identified in the "Postsecondary Education" respondents, and how colleges might be able to attract - and retain - stellar faculty.

Our first post in this series took an in-depth look at the top-ranked characteristic, exceptional instructional ability. The other key traits faculty should ideally possess include accessibility to students, diversity (in terms of gender, nationality, and background), "real-world" experience, and technological savvy. A tall order for a position that in many cases also is responsible for research and writing and publishing articles.

Some universities value top faculty because of the attention - and private funding - these individuals may draw to the campus. At the risk of raising some hackles, one wonders whether the goal of retaining faculty is more about the university than the students. Let's assume for the sake of argument that it's about the students, and let's take it a step further and assume higher education institutions are ready for a paradigm shift. How then, might universities be able to hire and keep outstanding teaching staff?

"Real-world" or practical experience can occur under a couple of scenarios, one being a working professional who decides to switch careers and become a college professor. The other, less traditional approach would be a professional who works at a higher education institution that allows them the flexibility to maintain a "real-world" position and teach part-time. The latter model allows students to learn from someone who is working in the field they are teaching, while giving faculty the freedom to earn a salary with benefits that, when combined with a part time university position, may exceed what they would have earned as a full-time professor.

Yes, this would involve radical change, and yes, it would turn the traditional higher education model on its side. But change is exactly what survey respondents feel is necessary in order to accommodate the 21st century student.

While we're on the subject of change, let's talk technology. A point not covered in yesterday's post about technology and higher education is the challenge faced by college professors as they struggle to learn new technology and social media. University development staff may consider building a strong case for corporations to fund technology training for college faculty. Postsecondary institutions that offer a robust technology training module or financial incentives for faculty who incorporate new technology into their curricula or research may attract more forward-thinking teaching staff.

We obviously won't solve the issue here, but the takeaway is that change is vital to the future of higher education. For a university to be able to hire and retain an excellent teaching staff, it must be willing to adapt a new paradigm, one that is flexible enough to stay in step with a rapidly changing postsecondary education landscape.

What are your ideas on possible solutions to the higher education system's faculty retention dilemma?

SOURCE:
http://www.latimes.com/health/la-me-brain-drain-20110629,0,3320287.story