Timothy W. Sineath
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
the library and information
science education programs
accredited by the American Library Association (ALA) on January 1,
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
(July l, 2000 to June 30, 2001). Data is also provided this year for
2001 -02 to bring
the two parts together. In requesting the data appearing in Part I, each dean, director,
and program chair was assured that there would be complete confidentiality
of the information supplied. Thus,
in this part of the report, neither individual faculty members nor
individual schools are linked to specific data that pertains to information
on salary, gender, race, age, or any other category covered.
However, individual schools are identified in the tables found
in Part II.
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
As in the previous editions benefits were not reported as
part of the salaries and stipends for summer teaching
off-campus teaching, or other over-load
compensations were also excluded.
Faculty members on sabbatical leave during 2001 -02 are
included in the analysis, although they had been omitted prior to
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
reporting in a given category of the
questionnaire and whether FTE or headcount is the appropriate figure. The number of full-time faculty in the 56 schools
ranged from a low of five in two
schools to a high of 34 in one
school. The average faculty
size (excluding reported unfilled positions) was 12.6 ,
which an increase
over last year’s figure of 13.0.
Average faculty size has varied very little in the last decade
as shown in Table
I-2 shows the variation in the number of full-time faculty on
January 1, 2002 among the 56 schools.
table shows that 15 ( 28.7
percent) of the 56 schools had full-time faculties of nine or fewer
including the dean or director. This
represents a decrease of six school
the number of schoo ls in
this category over 2000-2001 .The most common
faculty sizes (i.e., the size
of the largest number of schools) in 2000-2001 is
eight and ten
schools report ing facult y
of these sizes. However, Table
I-2 shows a wide range in t he
number of schools among the sizes indicated.
Of the 725 regular faculty
reporting gender, including the deans and directors, on January 1,
the 56 schools, 366 (50.5 percent) are male s, 359 (49.5
percent) are female s. An examination of Table I-3 shows
that this is virtually the same ratio as reported
in last year. The 1997-1998 ratio of female to male faculty
members was the highest of any years in the time period
f rom 1976
to the present ,
and it has increased each year for the last decade. The ratio has changed
very little during
the entire time period . In terms of the total number of faculty, in
2001-2002 almost an exact 1:1 ratio of males and females exists.
1-4 reports the 2001-2002 male/female ratio
of full-time faculty by rank in comparison with that of 2000-2001.
table also shows the current year in contrast to that of
ten years ago: 1992 -1993. Because the number of schools reporting has
changed somewhat from year to year, it is the percentage rather than
the actual number of faculty members that is of primary significance
in this table. In 1992-1993, 41.4
percent of the faculty in all ranks (including deans and directors)
were females. In the
past, there have been larger changes at specific academic ranks. The rank at which the most significant increases
in the number of females has been typically at the assistant professor
Deans and Directors
Among the 56 schools, there
were five changes in appointments of
between January 1, 2001 and January 1, 2002. This represents a change in leadership of 8.9
percent. A review of the number
in the past few years shows changes from
1980 to the present shows lows of 5 changes
to a high of 15 changes in a year.
Of the five "new" deans and directors in 2001-2002,
newly appointed in an interim status.
Of the three regular appointments, two are male and one is female.
All three hold the rank of professor.
Following is a list of the schools with new
officers in 2001-2002: Arizona
( Director), Illinois (interim dean), Maryland
(interim dean), North Carolina Greensboro (chair), and Texas (dean)
The breakdown of the administrative titles of the
officers of the 56 schools on
January 1, 2002 is reported in Table I-5. This breakdown includes the acting deans or
Of the 55 deans and directors
(and persons holding the title of chair),
including those holding acting or temporary status, 41 (74.5 percent)
have the rank of professor , a decrease of 4.1 percent
over 2000-2001. Of the deans
and directors, 34 are male s (61.8 percent)
and 21 (38.1 percent) are female s. Fourteen hold the rank of associate professor.
Of these, eight are male s and six
are female s. Thirteen (92.8 percent) of
those holding the associate professor rank held tenure at the time of reporting.
males who were executive officers
on January 1, 2002 had earned doctorates. All 21 female
possessed earned doctorates.
Of the 55 doctorates held by deans and directors, 40 (72.7
percent) were in
the library and information science s. This number
has increased slightly over that
reported last year. Two of
the new deans (including interim) hold doctorates in fields other
library and information sciences.
Table I-6 shows
the disciplines of the doctorates held by the deans and directors
of the schools.
Schools were asked to indicate the ethnic origin
of deans and directors. Of
the 48 deans and directors of schools located in the US,
44 are white and four are of minority ethnic origin. Of the four with minority origin, three are Black ,
and one is Hispanic.
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
serving as of January 1, 2002, including those in an acting capacity.
This table shows that 49 (87.5
percent) of the
were 50 years of age or older on January 1, 2002. This is the same percentage reported last year.
Eleven (19.6 percent) of the deans and directors who held regular
appointments were 60 years of age or older as of January 1,
2002. Th at
number was 12
last year, but has varied little over recent years. When acting or temporary appointments are excluded,
little difference in the relative percentages in t h e
age group occurs. (
that has reported ages of only permanent heads is, then unnecessary
and is being omitted from this edition of the
shows this distribution by gender
and indicates that the number of male
deans and directors 60 years of age or older is
two more than that of female deans.
In 1984 through 1990 increases were noted, but in 1983 it was
reported that due to the policies in existence in many colleges and
universities that require persons holding administrative posts to
vacate these positions at age 65, 21.4 percent of the executive officers
in 1983 could be expected to retire as deans or directors within five years. Th is
wave of retirements has taken place, and as is evident from
the data that t he number of person in th is
category has decreased slightly. The number of deans and directors that are
in the 50-54 and 55-59 age categories may i ndicate
that another wave of retirements from program
head positions will
begin in a few years.
Salary figures as of January
1, 2002 were reported for 54 of the 56 deans and directors. Of the 56 schools, Pittsburgh w
not release the Dean's
salary and Clarion did designate
a director. Of the deans and
directors, 48 hold fiscal year (11 or 12 month) appointments. Of those holding fiscal year appointments, 31 are male and 17 are
female. Five males and two females hold academic
In 2000-2001, fourteen deans and directors reported salaries
of $120,000 or more with the highest being
$210,000. All in this category
are in US schools. Ten schools
salaries in the range of $100,000 to
In 2001-2002, fifteen deans and directors reported salaries
of $120,000 or more with the highest being
$218,000. All in this category are in US schools. Seven schools reported executive salaries in
the range of $100,000 to $119,000.
As has been noted, salary differences are influenced, in part
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 US to $1.00 C
anadian. Some have commented that the exchange rate
should be used as a control variable leading to an equalization of
salary data. However, as noted
in previous volumes of this study, if Canadian cost-of-living differences
are considered, it would be equally appropriate to apply cost-of-living
differences to various cities and regions of the US, thus making the
reporting procedure impossibly complicated and not any more meaningful.
Other methods exist to compare cost-of-living and the Canadian
US exchange rate. Therefore
the method of dealing with this problem is to call the reader's attention
to the fluctuating exchange rate and, in some instances, to provide
separate tables for U.S. and Canadian schools.
This solution has been used in each of the preceding years
of the report, and will be this year also.
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
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,
persons), 31 are males and 15
are females. For
the males, the mean salary was $117,563 (median $110,967).
This is an increase in the mean salary of male deans and directors
of $10,308, over January 1, 2001 -- an increase of 9.6 percent.
For the female deans and directors who hold fiscal year appointments,
the mean salary on January 1, 2002 was $103.517 (median $97,726) , for an increase of $5,791 (5.5 percent).
Salary differentials are evident when
one compares them in rank 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
males and females. The top three reported salaries were for males. In 1999-2000 the 10 highest salaries were for
2000-2001and in 2001-02, two of the top five salaries are for females. These figures are
only estimates since Pittsburgh does
not report the salary of its female dean.
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
increase of 2.57 percent last
year. However, this figure
is less meaningful because of changes in the persons holding deanships
from year to year. The percentages indicate only the salary improvements
for the positions of deans and directors rather than improvements
for individuals. The meaning
of this increase is somewhat further eroded by the difference in schools
represented in the two-year periods.
Table I-8 indicates
the length of administrative service of the 55 deans and directors
acting appointments in the
schools where they presently serve.
the table shows, on January
1, 2002, seven deans and directors had held their administrative positions
for ten years or more. This
represents approximately 12. 5
percent of deans. At the other
end of the longevity spectrum, 26 deans and directors have been appointed
to their present position since 1998, a period of only three years
and 35 (62.5
percent) have served for five years or less.
This is further evidence of a
great deal of change in
library and information science education leadership and indicates a
high rate of turnover among executive officers
in the education programs in the US and Canada. From all indications this is a continuing trend
in higher education administration generally.
Meaningful data regarding
full-time faculty who assist the executive officer in administering the
school is difficult to compare because major differences exist in
these positions among the schools.
In most instances, these faculty members carry out administrative
responsibilities, but have reduced teaching loads.
Some, however, do not teach, but devote their entire time to administrative
the administrative roles, as well as the rewards for this
service, differ widely both in terms of academic rank and salary.
As in earlier reports, this group of faculty is identified
here as "associate (assistant, etc.) deans and directors."
Only those who are considered “faculty” as well as have
administrative roles are included.
Of the 56 schools in 2001-2002, 16 had full-time faculty serving
as associate (assistant, etc.) deans and directors. Two of the 13 schools ha ve
two faculty members with such appointments, for a total of four individuals.
In 2000-2001, 13 schools had
1980-81, nearly half of the schools had one or more associate
(assistant, etc.) deans or directors. In recent years, both the number and the percentage of schools with
or assistant deans (directors, etc.) have decreased.
New Faculty Appointments
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
Table I-11 shows
of the new faculty members appointed to
full-time regular positions in the various faculty ranks for the 2001-2002
academic and fiscal year.
five new appointments at the professor level received
year appointment. All
had earned doctorates; all were granted tenure. The age categories are:
three in 50 -54,
one 45-49, and one in 60-64.
Of the 13 new associate professors who were not deans or
received academic year appointments ; all held
earned doctorates ; and four were
granted tenure. Their age
are: three in 40-44, five in 45-49,
three in 50-59, and two in 55-59.
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
year. Of the
60 new assistant professors appointed, 32 are male (53.3 percent)
and 28 are
female (46.6 percent).
60 new assistant professors, 52 had completed their doctorate by January
2002. The disciplines of the new assistant professors
with earned doctorates are distributed into
the following fields (Table I-11-a).
Of the 60 new assistant professors in 2001-2002 , seven are at Canadian schools. Of
the 53 in the US, 41 are White; seven are
Asian or Pacific Islander; two are Black; two are Hispanic,
and one “other”. Age categories
were provided in Table
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
for the academic year to the rank of assistant professor was
$57,039 (median $55,000). For
the 22 females appointed
as assistant professors for the academic year, the mean salary
was $48,445 (median $45,000).
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,
females have accounted for 198 (55.6 percent)
while males have accounted for 158 (44.4 percent).
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
, as compared to those appointed for
the academic year.
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
$75,208 (median $82,000).
There were five new appointments at the rank of professor:
two are male and three
females. The mean of reported professor salaries was
$86,377 (median $63,000).
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).
Table I-13 allows
one to compare 2001-2002 mean and median salaries at each rank with
those of a year earlier (
2000 -01). Salary figures do not include Puerto Rico.
In addition, Pittsburgh withheld the dean’s salary, South Carolina
did not provide salary data for one associate professor (fiscal year
appointment); and Clarion did not designate a dean or director.
For 2001-2002, a total of 717 salaries (including deans and
directors) were reported.
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. (
13 schools reporting)
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
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 US to $1.00 C
Improvements in the mean faculty
at each rank are shown in Table I-14. It should be kept in mind that promotions,
resignations, retirements, and new appointments in 2000-2001 result
in a different group of people being compared for these two years. Because actual names of faculty members are
not provided by the schools, it is not possible to separate the continuing
faculty in a given rank from those entering that rank. The results of these limitations mean that
the improvement in salary is for the incumbents of each rank at a
given time and do not reflect individual salary improvement.
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
males and females. Female
dean and director salaries exceed those of males . Male salaries exceed female salaries in all
ranks with fiscal year and academic year appointments.
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 faculty members. Care
should be taken when comparing year-to-year percentages because the
base number of faculty varies each year.
Table I-18 provides
age category data for full-time faculty with academic rank
all 56schools. The percentage of faculty 55 or older as of
January 1, 2002 is 36.5 percent.
It has been noted in earlier reports that the average age of
the faculty has been increasing.
While the range of faculty 55 or older has remained at 30 to
34 percent for at least a decade, this year the percentage increased
slightly. Comparisons can
only be tentative given differences in base numbers resulting from
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
whose rank was reported, who was employed
on January 1, 2002 nearly two-thirds (65.9
percent) of the faculty members had been appointed by their schools
in the last ten years (1992-1993 through 2001-2002).
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.
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
and information science s (including information systems and technology, information
transfer, and information resource management). Of the remaining faculty with doctorates, 237
earned them in other fields. The
remaining 30 doctoral areas were undesignated.
Data on the number of faculty with earned doctorates is
provided for the last ten years in the following table. The ratio of
females and males holding
the doctorate has remained approximately equal.
Table I-23 provides
a listing of the disciplines other than
library and information science s in which faculty
members held doctorates. While
deans were asked to be precise in identifying these disciplines in
completing the questionnaire, the responses often were not clear,
and the provided instructions were frequently given varying interpretations. The fields other than library science, information
sciences, and library/information science are quite varied, as has
been the case in the past. For
example, in the field of education, numerous specific sub-fields are
identified, some of which might be the same discipline or degree with
a slightly different name. Because
of the wide variation, the doctorates in fields other than library
and/or information sciences are identified by discipline.
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.
Of the 725 full-time faculty
the 56 schools, 56.3
percent had tenure on January 1, 2002.
Information on tenure for the last 10 years is reported in
Table I-25. As can be seen from this table, the percent
of the total faculty who are tenured has not fluctuated significantly
from year to year. It also
shows, however, there are now 8 percent fewer tenured faculty compared
to a decade ago.
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.
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
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
of the questionnaire asked schools to indicate the type
of calendar in use (i.e., semester, quarter, trimester, etc.) These responses are reported in Table I-41. (Type of academic year is also provided in
summary form in Table III-1.) Because
of the differences in academic calendars, only fall term faculty data
have comparative value, since this is the only term that all schools
have in common regardless of type of calendar.
An example will illustrate this.
Some schools call it the spring term or semester; others call
it winter term. Also, it appears that some schools that have
two summer sessions have labeled one as spring and the other as summer.
The second question asked the schools to indicate the number
of full-time faculty for
the fall 2000 and the summer and fall of 2001 terms. Th is data is have been included
in Table I-41. The 56 schools report a total of 695 faculty members
for the 2000 fall semester with an average
of 12.4 faculty members per school.
The total reported for fall 2001 was 719 with an average of 12.8 per
school. These figures do not include reported vacant positions. The total reported for 1999 -2000 was
675 faculty for an average of 11.3 per school.
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
fall term. This represents a n estimated FTE
of 177.25, bringing the total faculty force to approximately
872.25 (1,281 persons). In
terms of individuals (not FTE) part-time faculty make up about 47.6 percent of
total faculty strength -- an increase of 5.5 percent over last year.
Table 43 also shows that 595 persons taught in
fall 2001. This is an estimated FTE of 176. 49, bringing the total to
(1314 persons. This represents
45.3 percent of the total faculty strength – a decrease of 2.3 percent over
Question 4 asked
for the average percentage of salary improvement for full-time faculty
in 2000-2001 and in 20
001-2002. Question 5 then asked the basis on which improvements in faculty
salaries were made. The responses
to these questions are presented in
Among the schools that provided data on the percentage
of salary improvement for 2000-2001, three schools indicated
zero increases. Overall, improvement
ranged from a low of 1.0 percent to a high of 11 percent,
with an average of 4. 28 percent for the 51 schools
reporting increases. Eight
schools reported increases of less than 3 percent.
Among the schools that provided
data for 2001-2002, three schools indicated zero increases. Overall improvement ranged from a low of 1
.00 percent to a high of 12.8 percent, with an average of 4. 06 percent for the 4 3 schools reporting increases .
The reports of previous years
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.
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
In Table I-47-a-1 shows that 36 unfilled full-time
faculty positions are reported for 24 schools in 2000-2001.
Last year's report
indicated that there were 27 vacancies despite the availability of funding
for the positions. The
explanations provided for positions vacant this year have been derived
from the data reported by the schools.
The explanations indicate that approximately half of the unfilled
openings were, as in the past, at the rank of assistant professor. However, a wide distribution of vacancies among
the ranks was reported: assistant (15), associate (1), professor (4),
undesignated (13), and open (3).
Also, as in the past, the reasons for unfilled positions vary. However, the majority of the schools reporting
unfilled positions indicate a somewhat even distribution among: lack
of success in getting appropriate candidates; and that searches were
in progress or completed. A
few schools continue to use vacant position salaries for alternative
uses. Finally, at a few schools, unrelated, local
conditions seem to be reflected.
In Table I-47-a-2
47 unfilled full-time positions are reported for 24 schools for
following distribution of ranks was reported: assistant (12), associate
(4), professor (5), undesignated (19), and open (7).
Question 7 on the questionnaire
seeks to identify full-time faculty positions that were temporarily
2000-01, but for which funding has been available.
However, Question 8 asks the schools to indicate whether faculty
positions had actually been lost in 2000-01. This
includes those instances where replacements could not be appointed
either because faculty positions assigned to the school by the parent
institution had been reduced in number or because limitations of the
school's budget simply required that the number of full-time faculty
be reduced. Three schools reported a total loss of three
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
As shown in Table I-47-c,
24 schools reported a total of 36 new positions. This represents a net gain of 33 positions when the 3 positions
noted in the previous table are factored in.
Last year 20 schools reported 34 new positions
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
to benefits such as retirement,
health insurance, etc., beyond actual salaries paid. This percentage is often required in making
grant proposals that will include faculty salaries ,
is often taken into account by applicants for faculty appointments
as they compute the total compensation of an offer.
Fifty-four schools reported an average percentage of approximately
26.9 percent (range of 11.9 to 56.8) for 2001-02.
A few schools show variation in the percentage over the last
five years. While a few schools reported
increases, others reported a decrease for the same period. It may be that the variation in these percentages,
as reported by the deans and directors results from differing methods of computing
Questions 11 and 12 of the
questionnaire pertain to funding for professional travel. Question 11 asks the number of faculty,
including the dean
or director, who received travel funds in 2000-01. Question 12 requests the total amount of funding
for professional travel used by the school's faculty
in 2000-01, exclusive of travel to teach in extension,
workshops, etc. It was noted
in this question that dollars spent by the institution on professional
travel should be included regardless of whether or not they were actually
included in the school's budget.
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
range among the schools was from a low of $2,500 to a high of $317,000
(median: $13,500. For
individual faculty members who received travel funds, the average
varied from a reported low of $420 to a high of $21,600 (median: $1,660). For the same period a total of 537 faculty
members were reported as having received travel funds. They shared a total of $1,371,274 in travel
money amounting to an average of $2,554 per person. The mean per school for the 54 schools reporting amounts
for individuals was $25,394 in 200-01 compared to $24,512 per school in 1999-2000.
It is difficult to know if these figures are meaningful since
schools are not consistent as to whether or not data on such expenditures
as recruitment, accreditation visits, or visiting faculty had been
excluded. The questionnaire
asks that these data not be included when reporting travel for faculty,
but it is likely that expenditures for these purposes may have been
reported along with faculty travel.
It would appear, however, from these data that average expenditures
for travel continue to increase slightly after a period of decrease.
The 13th question on the faculty
section of the questionnaire pertains to sabbatical 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.
The final question in the faculty
section of the ALISE questionnaire pertains to
the support staff
available to the schools. The
question was designed to separate part-time student employees of the
school from regular, non-student support staff.
Under each of these categories, the same group of subdivisions
was given: (a) Administrative
support; (b) Instructional support; (c) Research support; (d) Media
services; (e) Library personnel; (f) Computer lab; (g) Other.
The following definitions were provided on the questionnaire
for each subdivision:
(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
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
the total FTE of support staff (exclusive of students) varied in
2001-0 1 from a low of 1.0
to a high of 61.7 (mean for 2000-01: 8.17
and for 2001-02: 8.42). Because of the possible variation in the interpretation of the reporting
of library staff and the varying types of support staff included under
"other", meaningful comparison of the total FTE support
staff among the schools is not possible.
However, it is possible to compare data from some of the categories
as shown in the table. An
analysis of the data shows the following distribution of percentages
for all schools reporting.
Administrative Support |
Instructional Support |
Research Support |
Media Support |
Library Personnel |
Computer lab/ technology support |
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.