FACULTY
by
Following the pattern of previous reports, data on faculty
included in this report appear in two parts. Data in Part I have been compiled from a form submitted to this
writer, on a confidential basis, by the dean, director or chair of
Part II of the faculty section of this report has been compiled
from information provided by the 56 schools in response to the faculty
section of the general questionnaire prepared for the Association
for Library and Information Science Education.
The schools are listed in the tables, where appropriate, resulting
in a total of 56 schools.
Part I of the faculty section is based upon data reported
by the participating schools as of January 1, 2002. Part II, however provides information that pertained to the schools
during the fiscal year 2000‑
PART I
This is the twenty-ninth survey of faculty salaries and
related data pertaining to library and information science education
in this series. The first
ten were compiled and reported by Russell E.
Bidlack, Dean Emeritus of the School of Information at the
University of Michigan. The next three surveys were compiled by the
late Gary Purcell of the University of Tennessee. This is the sixteenth compilation by this writer. The format followed in the report is basically
the same as that used in previous years. The format has been retained in order to help ensure comparability
of data from year to year. Data were provided by the chief executive
offers of the 56 schools accredited by ALA on January 1, 2002.
The chief executive officers of all the schools are referred
to in this report as deans and directors for the sake of convenience
even though some hold other titles.
Each dean or director was requested to provide specific information
about each full-time faculty member, including the dean or director,
who held employed status in the school as of January 1, 2002. The categories of information requested were: (1) titles and/or academic rank; (2) annual
salary amount; (3) whether appointed for the fiscal or academic year;
(4) whether or not tenured; (5) gender; (6) highest degree earned;
(7) discipline of highest degree; (8) ethnic origin (except Canadian
schools); (9) age category (in five-year groupings); (10) year of
appointment to the school's full-time faculty; and (11) year of appointment
to present rank in the school in which currently employed.
These categories are the same as those used in the past several
years.
As in the previous editions benefits were not reported as
part of the salaries and stipends for summer teaching.
Faculty
Size
The number of full-time faculty
members at the 56 reporting schools, including deans and directors,
totaled 728, up from 708 last year.
This number does not include positions unfilled at the time
the report was submitted. The
base number used for most of the analyses that follows will be 728,
since this figure is the total of the FTE faculty of the reporting
schools. The base number for
some analyses may be fewer depending on the number of persons reported
for
Table
I-2 shows the variation in the number of full-time faculty on
January 1, 2002 among the 56 schools.
Of the 725 regular faculty
reporting gender, including the deans and directors, on January 1,
2002,
Table I
Deans and Directors
Among the 56 schools, there
were five changes in appointments of
Of the five "new" deans and directors in 2001-2002,
two were
Following is a list of the schools with new
The breakdown of the administrative titles of the Of the 55 deans and directors
All 34
Of the 55 doctorates held by deans and directors, 40 (72.7
percent) were in
Table I-6 shows
the disciplines of the doctorates held by the deans and directors
of the schools.
US
Age
Schools were asked to report
the ages of the faculty and the deans and directors. This information for heads of the schools is displayed in Table I-7 by
five-year categories. This
table includes all reporting
This table shows that 49 (87.5
percent) of the
Table I-7-a in the past
Table I-7-b
shows this distribution by gender of deans and directors. It
Salaries
Salary figures as of January
1, 2002 were reported for 54 of the 56 deans and directors. Of the 56 schools, Pittsburgh would
In 2000-2001, fourteen deans and directors reported salaries
of $120,000 or more with the highest being in excess of
In 2001-2002, fifteen deans and directors reported salaries
of $120,000 or more with the highest being
In previous years, the issue of the difference between salaries
paid by Canadian schools and schools located in the US has been discussed. The question has always been whether the exchange
rate between the two currencies should be factored in when comparing
salaries. Canadian salaries
traditionally have been higher than those in the US, and the exchange
rate has continued to change. The
exchange rate is currently approximately $0.64 USD to $1.00 CAN
The salaries of the 46 deans and directors with fiscal year salaries (including those in an acting capacity) ranged from a high
of $218,000 to a low of $67,613.
The mean salary for these deans and directors with fiscal year
appointments was $112,983 (median $102,351).
The mean salary for Canadian deans and directors was $94,053
(median $94,044). It should
be noted that two of the
Canadian deans and directors
An analysis of the 8 deans and directors receiving their
salaries on an academic
year basis shows a range of $157,000 to $53,224.
The mean for these deans and directors was $82.840 (median
$76,650). All the reported
salaries were in US schools.
Of the 46 deans and directors having fiscal year appointments who reported their salaries,
(including those serving in an acting capacity
Salary differentials are evident when
one compares them in a ranked order. The
gap between male and female salaries has been narrowing. In 1997-1998, six of the 10 highest salaries
received were evenly split between
Table I-7-c
shows that for the reporting 46 deans with fiscal year appointments (including acting deans and heads of Canadian
schools), the percentage of increase in the average salary was 6.4
percent, up from the
Table I-8 indicates
the length of administrative service of the 55 deans and directors
with regular or
Assistant/Associate Deans or Directors
Meaningful data regarding
In 2000-2001, 13 schools (23.2 percent) had associate/assistant dean or directors
It should be noted that only full-time
faculty members serving in positions as associate or assistant deans
(directors, etc.) are included in this report.
A number of schools have individuals (support staff), other
than full-time faculty, who serve as administrative assistants to
the dean or director. They
are reported in Table I-52 as support staff.
New Faculty Appointments
During
the 2001-2002
academic year, exclusive of deans and directors, 91 new full-time
faculty members were appointed. Table I-10 provides
a basis for comparing the annual number of new faculty appointments
over the past 15 years. In
earlier reports, this table counted deans and directors, including
those with acting or interim status, even when appointed from within
their own faculties. However, since a marked increase of acting
or interim deans and directors tended to skew the figures, this table
has been recalculated for the previous years to exclude all
deans and directors in the new appointment columns.
Deans and directors are included, however, in the total full-time
faculty count.
Characteristics
Table I-11 shows
the gender
Four
of the
five new appointments at the professor level received
Of the 13 new associate professors who were not deans or
directors, eight
Because the most common rank at which new faculty members
are appointed is that of assistant professor, the salaries paid this
group, along with other characteristics, are always of particular
interest. There were 60 new assistant professors appointed to permanent
positions in 2001-2002. This compares with 56 in 2000-2001
Of
Seven of
Salaries
The salaries reported for the
60 new assistant professors appointed in 2001-2002 ranged from a high
of $85,500 to a low of $30,000. The
mean salary for the 47 persons with an academic
year appointment (which included no Canadian appointments) was
$53,017 and the median $50,000.
The mean salary for the 25
Table I-11-c
shows the mean beginning salaries for assistant professors with academic
year appointments since 1992-1993. Of the 356 of academic year
appointments since 1992-1993,
All thirteen new fiscal
year appointments at the assistant professor rank had salaries
reported for them (Table
I-12). During the past
29 years, relatively few fiscal year appointments have been made at
the assistant professor level
New
Associate Professor and Professor Salaries
Thirteen new appointments were
made at the associate professor rank.
Seven are male and six female.
Eight had academic year appointments. These academic year appointments had a mean salary of $68,112 (median
$66,250). Five had fiscal year appointments with a mean salary of
There were five new appointments at the rank of professor:
two are male and three
New
Instructor and Lecturer Salaries
There were seven full-time instructors appointed during
2001-2002. Four had academic
year appointments. The
mean salary of these four appointments was $42,391 (median $42,781).
There were six full-time lecturers appointed during 2001-2002.
The mean salary for the academic year appointments was
$47,814 (median $48,000).
All Faculty
Salaries
Table I-13 allows
one to compare 2001-2002 mean and median salaries at each rank with
those of a year earlier (
The mean and median salaries
shown above in Table I-13 have been based on all salaries reported
without regard to region. Furthermore,
no attempt has been made to compute the exchange rate between the
Canadian dollar and the US dollar.
Canadian university salaries are often higher than those in
the US. Table
I-13-a shows average salaries by US region and Canada. The regions are those used by ALA's Committee
on Accreditation. The number
of faculty salaries included is shown in parentheses in each category. In those instances where only one salary fits
into a given category, the salary is not reported in order to protect
the privacy of the individual to whom the salary applies.
Northeast: Albany, Buffalo, Catholic, Clarion, Drexel, Long Island, Maryland,
Pittsburgh, Pratt, Queens, Rhode Island, Rutgers, St. John's, Simmons,
Southern Connecticut, Syracuse. (All
16 schools reporting)
Southeast: Alabama, Clark Atlanta, Florida State, Kentucky, Louisiana State,
North Carolina Central, North Carolina – Chapel Hill, North Carolina
– Greensboro, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, South Florida, Southern
Mississippi, Tennessee. (12 of
Midwest: Dominican, Emporia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kent State, Michigan,
Missouri, Wayne State, Wisconsin – Madison, Wisconsin – Milwaukee.
(All 11 schools reporting)
Southwest: Arizona, North Texas, Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Woman's. (All 5 schools reporting)
West: California – Los Angeles, Hawaii, San Jose, Washington.
(All 4 schools reporting)
Canada: Alberta, British Columbia, Dalhousie, McGill, Montréal, Toronto,
Western Ontario. (All 7 schools
reporting)
Table I-13-b
shows the difference between mean salaries in the schools in the US
and those in Canada. In evaluating
these figures it is important to remember that the difference in exchange
rate between the US and the Canadian dollars on January 1, 2002 was
approximately $.64 USD to $1.00 CAN
Improvements in the mean faculty
salary in 2001-2002
In reading the following table,
one should keep in mind that the small number of faculty holding the
instructor and lecturer rank, and the small number of deans and directors
holding an academic year appointment, may detract from the significance
of those particular percentages.
Table I-15 enables
one to compare the mean salaries in each faculty rank for
Ethnic
Background
The schools in the United States
were again asked to provide ethnic data for their full-time faculty.
Fifty-one schools (including two Canadian schools) that responded
to the survey provided the information listed in Table
I-17. This represents
664 of the 728 full-time
faculty members. Care
should be taken when comparing year-to-year percentages because the
base number of faculty varies each year.
Age
Table I-18 provides
age category data for full-time faculty with academic rank for
Year
of Initial Appointment and Rank
All schools responded to the
request for the date of initial appointment of each current faculty
member to its full-time faculty.
For each faculty member
Promotions
Among the full-time faculty
at the 56 schools, there were 20 promotions within the professorial
ranks. This compares with 21 last year. Table I-21 compares
promotions over the past five years.
Doctorates
The number of earned doctorates
held on January 1, 2002 for the faculty population of 725 reporting
(including Deans and Directors) was 654 (90.2 percent). This is decrease from last year (Table I-22-a). Of the faculty members holding the doctorate,
387 (59.2 percent) had that degree in
Data on the number of faculty with earned doctorates is
provided for the last ten years in the following table. The ratio of
Table I-23 provides
a listing of the disciplines other than
While 90.2 percent of the full-time
faculty in all the 56 schools had completed doctoral degrees prior
to January 1, 2002, the percentage of faculty within individual schools
holding the doctorate varied considerably.
The range is from a low of 50 percent at one school to a high
of 100 percent at 23 schools. Fifty-one
schools have faculties of which at least 75 percent hold the doctorate.
Tenure
Of the 725 full-time faculty
No school reported having an all-tenured
faculty in 2001-2002; that figure varied between one and six schools
over the last 10 years. Two
schools reported less than 25 percent tenured faculty.
Eleven schools have less than 50 percent tenured and 15 schools
have tenured faculties of 75 percent or higher.
The following table shows the variation among the 56 schools.
The Table I-26-a
shows tenure status by rank and gender of the faculty members holding
that academic rank. It should
be understood, of course, that deans and directors shown with tenure
enjoy that tenure as faculty members, not as their schools'
Table I-27 that shows faculty salaries
(including those for 54 deans and directors) in salary ranges by rank
has been omitted this year.
PART II
This is the twenty-third year
that the survey of library and information science faculty has included
data provided in response to the general questionnaire distributed
by the Association for Library and Information Science Education (ALISE). Data reported in Part II have been obtained
from this questionnaire. Data
reported in Part I of this report have been presented with the implied
understanding that the writer would not link specific data with any
single school. However, schools that respond to the non-confidential
part of the faculty portion of the ALISE questionnaire do so with
the understanding that they may be identified with the information
submitted. All 56 schools
responded and are identified in the tables in Part II.
It is important to note that the data reported in Part II
includes data from 2000-2001
and 2001-2002. In past
years data from Parts I and II were from different years.
The analysis that follows reports the responses to the questions
as asked on the ALISE general questionnaire. In those instances where data were not reported
by a school, a notation is indicated.
However, unless the school specifically stated on its questionnaire
that there are no data to report, the absence of data is of course
ambiguous. It could mean that there are no data to report
for the question or it could mean that the school simply did not respond
to the question.
Academic Calendar and Full-Time Faculty
The first question in the faculty
The second question asked the schools to indicate the number
of full-time faculty for
Adjunct, clinical, or other
than full-time "regular" faculty continue to play important
roles in the teaching effort of the schools.
The information reported in Table I-43 indicates
that 586 persons in these categories taught courses during the 2000
F
Salary
Improvement
Question 4 to the Faculty questionnaire asked
for the average percentage of salary improvement for full-time faculty
in 2000-2001 and in 20 Tables I-45
and I-45a.
Among the 54 schools that provided data on the percentage
of salary improvement for 2000-2001, three schools (5.6 percent) indicated
zero increases. Overall, improvement
ranged from a low of 1.0 percent to a high of 11 percent,
Among the 46 schools that provided
data for 2001-2002, three schools (6.5 percent) indicated zero increases. Overall improvement ranged from a low of 1
Faculty
Replacements
The reports of previous years
noted that
it is common to replace senior faculty members who retire, resign,
or otherwise leave a school, with individuals at lower ranks than
had been held by those being replaced.
This practice has been followed for many years.
In 2000-2001, however, 60.7 percent of replacements were at
the same or higher ranks. Table I-47 reports
the results of Question 6 that asks how many full-time faculty replacements
(resulting from resignations, retirements, etc.) were made during
2000-2001. Schools also were
asked to indicate the rank of the individual(s) who was/were replaced
and the rank of the replacement(s).
In 2000-2001, a total of 56 faculty replacements were made
in 34 schools. Of these 22 were at a lower rank; 32 at the
same rank; and two at a higher rank.
Unfilled
Faculty Positions
The seventh question on the
questionnaire asked schools to indicate if there were full-time positions,
for which funding was available, during 2000-2001 and 2001-2002. Schools were also asked to indicate the rank
and the reason the position was not filled. The intent of this question
is to identify the total number of full-time unfilled faculty positions. If funds were used on a temporary basis for
other purposes, such as employment of part-time persons, but with
the budget line remaining open, this was interpreted to be an unfilled
faculty position.
In Table I-47-a-2
47 unfilled full-time positions are reported for 24 schools for
Positions
Lost
Question 7 on the questionnaire
seeks to identify full-time faculty positions that were temporarily
unfilled in
This year's three positions loss is the same as that of
previous year. The trend apparent
in previous years continues to slow.
While some schools cannot hire new faculty due to budget constraints,
few have actually lost the faculty lines.
New Faculty Positions
Question 9 asks schools to
indicate whether additional (new) faculty positions, with new funding,
had been created in the schools in
Benefits
Schools were asked to report the value
of their institution's fringe benefits for faculty in terms of salary
percentage, i.e., the worth of the contributions of the institution
Professional Travel
Questions 11 and 12 of the
questionnaire pertain to funding for professional travel. Question 11 asks the number of faculty, ex
It is apparent from Table I-49 that
the amount of funding for faculty travel continues to vary greatly
among schools. The differences
have been noted since the survey began, and in most instances, the
relationship of travel budgets of individual schools to each other
has changed very little. For
Sabbatical Leave
The 13th question on the faculty
section of the questionnaire pertains to sabbatical or sabbatical like leaves
for faculty. A total of 29
schools granted funds for sabbatical or study leaves during 2000-2001,
compared to 28 in 1999-2000. Details
are provided in Table
I-51. Four schools (North
Carolina- Central, North Texas, Tennessee, and Texas Woman's) indicated
that no such leaves are granted at their institutions.
Support Staff
The final question in the faculty
section of the ALISE questionnaire pertains to
(a) Administrative Support
— Secretarial and other assistance provided the dean, assistant dean,
etc. in the administration of the school.
(b) Instructional Support
— Clerical and other assistance provided faculty members in their
course preparation and classroom teaching.
(c) Research Support — Secretarial
and other support provided the faculty in their research activity.
(d) Media Services — Assistance
provided by media technicians, graphic artists, and others in the
production and use of non-print media.
(e) Librarian Personnel
— Librarians and library assistants who serve in the library science
library, whether their salaries are paid from the library school's
budget or from that of the central library.
(f) Computer Lab — Those
persons who work in a computer laboratory operated by the school.
(g) Other — Any support
staff beyond those listed above.
If a full-time person divides his/her time between two or
more of the above categories that individual appears in appropriate
part-time categories.
Where obvious misinterpretations have been made by the schools,
the liberty of making slight adjustments in the data supplied by them
has been made. These have
all involved moving fractions of staff time listed as full-time personnel
where it seemed obvious that they were intended as FTE of part-time
staff.
Tables I-52
and 52a,
the total FTE of support staff (exclusive of students) varied in
"Other"
includes professional development; marketing/public relations/development;
placement; information technology coordinator, publications, and learning
lab support. Some schools
reported staff in more than one of these categories.
Table I-54 provides
similar information about part-time student support staff.
|