IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/reihed/v64y2023i3d10.1007_s11162-022-09712-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Leaving the Institution or Leaving the Academy? Analyzing the Factors that Faculty Weigh in Actual Departure Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Damani K. White-Lewis

    (University of Pennsylvania)

  • KerryAnn O’Meara

    (University of Maryland)

  • Kiernan Mathews

    (University of Chicago)

  • Nicholas Havey

    (First Book)

Abstract

Although research has revealed many factors that predict faculty turnover, the literature is often limited by using intent to leave as a proxy for actual turnover, and further by consolidating faculty who leave institutions with faculty who leave the occupation. We resolve these limitations and advance the faculty mobility literature by studying faculty who actually left their higher education institution for both academic and non-academic jobs. Drawing on a survey of 773 departing faculty respondents, we employed structural topic modeling and logistic regression to understand whether or not academic and non-academic leavers had statistically different reasons for leaving. Structural topic modeling revealed 12 dominant reasons why faculty leave, but none of these reasons were unique to those who left academia. Regression results show that gender, tenure status, and salary increase were significant drivers of leaving the academic profession. We provide implications for future studies of faculty departure and for faculty retention.

Suggested Citation

  • Damani K. White-Lewis & KerryAnn O’Meara & Kiernan Mathews & Nicholas Havey, 2023. "Leaving the Institution or Leaving the Academy? Analyzing the Factors that Faculty Weigh in Actual Departure Decisions," Research in Higher Education, Springer;Association for Institutional Research, vol. 64(3), pages 473-494, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:reihed:v:64:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s11162-022-09712-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s11162-022-09712-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11162-022-09712-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11162-022-09712-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grimmer, Justin & Stewart, Brandon M., 2013. "Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(3), pages 267-297, July.
    2. Grimmer, Justin, 2010. "A Bayesian Hierarchical Topic Model for Political Texts: Measuring Expressed Agendas in Senate Press Releases," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 1-35, January.
    3. KerryAnn O'Meara & Andrew Lounder & Corbin M. Campbell, 2014. "To Heaven or Hell: Sensemaking about Why Faculty Leave," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 85(5), pages 603-632, September.
    4. Cheryl J. Daly & Jay R. Dee, 2006. "Greener Pastures: Faculty Turnover Intent in Urban Public Universities," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(5), pages 776-803, September.
    5. M. Kevin Eagan & Audrey J. Jaeger & Ashley Grantham, 2015. "Supporting the Academic Majority: Policies and Practices Related to Part-Time Faculty's Job Satisfaction," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 86(3), pages 448-483, May.
    6. Vicki J. Rosser & Barbara K. Townsend, 2006. "Determining Public 2-Year College Faculty's Intent to Leave: An Empirical Model," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 77(1), pages 124-147, January.
    7. Ehrenberg, Ronald & Kasper, Hirschel & Rees, Daniel, 1991. "Faculty turnover at American colleges and universities: Analyses of AAUP data," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 99-110, June.
    8. Margaret E. Roberts & Brandon M. Stewart & Dustin Tingley & Christopher Lucas & Jetson Leder‐Luis & Shana Kushner Gadarian & Bethany Albertson & David G. Rand, 2014. "Structural Topic Models for Open‐Ended Survey Responses," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(4), pages 1064-1082, October.
    9. Linda K. Johnsrud & Vicki J. Rosser, 2002. "Faculty Members' Morale and Their Intention to Leave," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(4), pages 518-542, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michal Ovádek & Nicolas Lampach & Arthur Dyevre, 2020. "What’s the talk in Brussels? Leveraging daily news coverage to measure issue attention in the European Union," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(2), pages 204-232, June.
    2. Sanders, James & Lisi, Giulio & Schonhardt-Bailey, Cheryl, 2018. "Themes and topics in parliamentary oversight hearings: a new direction in textual data analysis," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 87624, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Grajzl, Peter & Murrell, Peter, 2021. "A machine-learning history of English caselaw and legal ideas prior to the Industrial Revolution I: generating and interpreting the estimates," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, February.
    4. David Bholat & Stephen Hans & Pedro Santos & Cheryl Schonhardt-Bailey, 2015. "Text mining for central banks," Handbooks, Centre for Central Banking Studies, Bank of England, number 33, April.
    5. Dehler-Holland, Joris & Schumacher, Kira & Fichtner, Wolf, 2021. "Topic Modeling Uncovers Shifts in Media Framing of the German Renewable Energy Act," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 2(1).
    6. Parijat Chakrabarti & Margaret Frye, 2017. "A mixed-methods framework for analyzing text data: Integrating computational techniques with qualitative methods in demography," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 37(42), pages 1351-1382.
    7. Zhang, Han, 2021. "How Using Machine Learning Classification as a Variable in Regression Leads to Attenuation Bias and What to Do About It," SocArXiv 453jk, Center for Open Science.
    8. Ferrara, Federico M. & Masciandaro, Donato & Moschella, Manuela & Romelli, Davide, 2022. "Political voice on monetary policy: Evidence from the parliamentary hearings of the European Central Bank," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    9. Camilla Salvatore & Silvia Biffignandi & Annamaria Bianchi, 2022. "Corporate Social Responsibility Activities Through Twitter: From Topic Model Analysis to Indexes Measuring Communication Characteristics," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 164(3), pages 1217-1248, December.
    10. Yang Bao & Anindya Datta, 2014. "Simultaneously Discovering and Quantifying Risk Types from Textual Risk Disclosures," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(6), pages 1371-1391, June.
    11. Mónica D. Oliveira & Inês Mataloto & Panos Kanavos, 2019. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment: addressing methodological challenges to improve the state of the art," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(6), pages 891-918, August.
    12. Alex Luscombe & Kevin Dick & Kevin Walby, 2022. "Algorithmic thinking in the public interest: navigating technical, legal, and ethical hurdles to web scraping in the social sciences," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 1023-1044, June.
    13. Dehler-Holland, Joris & Okoh, Marvin & Keles, Dogan, 2022. "Assessing technology legitimacy with topic models and sentiment analysis – The case of wind power in Germany," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    14. Oliver Wieczorek & Saïd Unger & Jan Riebling & Lukas Erhard & Christian Koß & Raphael Heiberger, 2021. "Mapping the field of psychology: Trends in research topics 1995–2015," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9699-9731, December.
    15. Ulrich Fritsche & Johannes Puckelwald, 2018. "Deciphering Professional Forecasters’ Stories - Analyzing a Corpus of Textual Predictions for the German Economy," Macroeconomics and Finance Series 201804, University of Hamburg, Department of Socioeconomics.
    16. Lino Wehrheim, 2019. "Economic history goes digital: topic modeling the Journal of Economic History," Cliometrica, Springer;Cliometric Society (Association Francaise de Cliométrie), vol. 13(1), pages 83-125, January.
    17. Margaret E. Roberts & Brandon M. Stewart & Richard A. Nielsen, 2020. "Adjusting for Confounding with Text Matching," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(4), pages 887-903, October.
    18. Christopher Wratil & Sara B Hobolt, 2019. "Public deliberations in the Council of the European Union: Introducing and validating DICEU," European Union Politics, , vol. 20(3), pages 511-531, September.
    19. Heike Klüver, 2015. "The promises of quantitative text analysis in interest group research: A reply to Bunea and Ibenskas," European Union Politics, , vol. 16(3), pages 456-466, September.
    20. Hager, Anselm & Hilbig, Hanno, 2020. "Does Public Opinion Affect Political Speech?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 64(4), pages 921-937.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:reihed:v:64:y:2023:i:3:d:10.1007_s11162-022-09712-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.