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, 2004. All 56 schools reported data for Part I.
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.
Part I of the faculty section is
based upon data reported by the participating schools as of
This is the thirty-first 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
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
As in the previous editions benefits were not reported as part of the salaries. Stipends for summer teaching, off-campus teaching, or other over-load compensations were also excluded. Faculty members on sabbatical leave during 2003-2004 are included in the analysis, although they had been omitted in reports prior to 1987.
The number of full-time faculty members at the 56 reporting schools including deans and directors, totaled 783, up from 758 last year. This number does not include positions unfilled at the time the data were submitted. The base number used for most of the analyses that follows will be 783 since this figure is the total of the full-time 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 41 in one school. The average faculty size (excluding reported unfilled positions) was 14, an increase over last year’s figure of 13.5. Average faculty size has varied little in the last decade as shown in Table I-1.
I-2 shows the variation in the number of full-time faculty on
Of the 783 full-time faculty, including deans and directors, as January 1, 2004 in the 56 schools for whom gender was reported, 386 (49.3 percent) are male, 397 (50.7 percent) are female. An examination of Table I-3 shows that this is virtually the same ratio as reported last year. The 1997-1998 ratio of female to male faculty members was the highest of any year in the time period from 1976 to the present. The ratio has changed very little during the entire time period. In terms of the total number of faculty, again for 2003-2004, there exists nearly an exact 1:1 ratio of males and females.
Table 1-4 reports the 2003-2004 male/female ratio of full-time faculty by rank compared to 2002‑2003. This table also shows the current year in contrast to ten years ago: 1994-1995. 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 female. In the past, there have been larger changes at specific academic ranks. The rank at which the most notable increases in the number of females has been typically at the assistant professor level.
Deans and Directors
the 56 schools, there were twelve changes in appointments of executive officers
Of the twelve "new" deans and directors in 2003, five was newly appointed in an interim status. Of the seven regular appointments, two are male and five female. Five hold the rank of professor and two the rank of associate professor.
The following are the schools with new executive officers in 2003: Alabama (director), Albany (dean), British Columbia (director), Catholic (dean), Emporia (interim director), Illinois (dean), Indiana (interim dean), North Carolina Central (interim dean), Southern Mississippi (director), Tennessee (interim director), Texas Woman’s (interim director), and Western Ontario (director).
The breakdown of the administrative
titles of the executive officers of the 56 schools on
Of the 56 deans and directors (and persons holding the title of chair), including those holding acting or temporary status, 38 (67.9 percent) have the rank of professor, a increase of 1.7 percent over 2002 Twenty-nine of the deans and directors are male (51.8 percent) and 27 (48.2 percent) female. Eighteen (32.1 percent) hold the rank of associate professor. Of these, seven are male and 11 are female. Sixteen of those holding the associate professor rank held tenure at the time of reporting.
All executive officers on
Table I-6 shows the disciplines of doctorates held by deans and directors of the schools.
U.S. Schools were asked to indicate the ethnic origin of deans and directors. Of the 51 deans and directors of schools reporting ethnic origins (including some Canadian schools), 48 are white and three are of minority ethnicity. Of the three of minority origin, two are Black, and one Hispanic.
were asked to report ages of both the faculty and the deans and directors. This information for heads of the schools is
displayed in Table
I-7-a in five-year categories. This
table includes all 56 executive officers serving as of
Forty-seven of the chief executive officers (83.9 percent) were 50 years of age or older on January 1, 2004. This is a slightly smaller percentage than that reported last year. Fourteen (25 percent) of the deans and directors holding regular appointments were 60 years of age or older. That number also was 14 last year and has varied little over recent years. When acting or temporary appointments are excluded, little difference in the relative percentages of these age groups occurs.
Table I-7-b shows this age distribution of executive officers by gender. It reveals that male and female deans and directors ( six and eight respectively) 60 years of age or older constitute 64.3 percent of those in this age group.
From 1984 through 1990 increases in those age 60 and older were noted, but in 1983 it was reported that due to the policies in existence in many colleges and universities that required persons holding administrative posts to vacate those positions at age 65, 21.4 percent of the executive officers in 1983 could be expected to retire as dean or director within five years. This wave of retirements has taken place, but as is evident from the data, the number of person in this age category has increased slightly. The number of deans and directors that are in the 50-54 and 55-59 age categories may indicate that another wave of retirements of executive officers may have begun.
figures as of
In previous years, the issue of the
difference between salaries paid by Canadian schools and schools located in the
The salaries of the 46 deans and directors with fiscal year salaries (including those in an acting capacity) ranged from a high of $231,251 to a low of $60,720. The mean salary for these deans and directors with fiscal year appointments was $117,813 (median $106,227). The mean salary for Canadian deans and directors was $119,059 (median $111,766). It should be noted that two of the deans and directors are associate professors.
An analysis of the 10 deans and directors receiving their salaries on an academic year basis shows a range of $55,836 to $110,000. The mean for these deans and directors was $79,834 (median $78,130). All the reported academic year salaries were in US schools.
Of the 46 deans and directors having fiscal year appointments who reported their salaries, (including acting persons), 26 are male and 20 female. For the males, the mean salary was $130,646 (median $112,600). This is an increase in the mean salary of male deans and directors of $15,157, over January 1, 2003. For the female deans and directors who hold fiscal year appointments, the mean salary on January 1, 2004 was $101.774 (median $95,932), for a decrease of $5,325 (4.9 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, although the top three reported salaries were for males. In 1999-2000 the 10 highest salaries were for males. In 2001-2002, 2002-2003, and in 2003-2004, two of the top five salaries were for females.
Table I-7-c shows that for the 46 deans with fiscal year appointments (including acting deans and heads of Canadian schools), the average salary decreased by 4.8 percent, up from the increase of 0.04 percent the previous 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 56 deans and directors with regular and acting appointments in the schools where they presently serve. As the table shows, on January 1, 2004, only two deans and directors had held their administrative positions for ten years or more. At the other end of the longevity spectrum, 35 deans and directors (62.5 percent) have been appointed to their present position since 2000, and 42 (75.0 percent) have served for five years or less. This is further evidence of the 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 both the US and Canada. From all indications this is a continuing trend in higher education administration generally.
Associate (Assistant, etc.) Deans and Directors
Meaningful data regarding the 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 responsibilities. Also, 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 having administrative roles are included in the analysis. Of the 56 schools in 2003-2004, 18 had full-time faculty serving as associate (assistant, etc.) deans and directors. Six of the 18 schools had two or more faculty members with such appointments for a total of 27 individuals. See Table I-9.
In 2002-2003, 12 schools had associate (assistant, etc.) dean and director positions. In 1980‑1981, nearly half the schools had one or more full-time faculty serving as associate (assistant, etc.) deans or directors. In recent years, both the number and the percentage of schools with full-time associate (assistant, etc.) deans and directors have, however increased.
It should be noted again that only full-time faculty members serving in positions as associate (assistant, etc.) deans and directors 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 2003-2004 academic year, exclusive of deans and directors, 73 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 ten 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 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.
Table I-11 shows the gender of the new faculty members appointed to full-time regular, i.e., non-dean/director, positions in the various faculty ranks for the 2002-2003 academic and fiscal years.
Of the 10 new associate professors who were not deans or directors, 8 received academic year appointments; all held earned doctorates; and two were granted tenure. Their age categories are: one 40-44, two 40-44, one 45-49, four 50-59, none 55-59, and two 60-64.
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 48 new assistant professors appointed to positions in 2003-2004. This compares with 56 last year. Of the 48 new assistant professors appointed, 20 are male (41.7 percent) and 28 are female (58.3 percent).
Among the 48 new assistant professors, 44 had completed their doctorate by January 2004. The disciplines of the new assistant professors with earned doctorates were distributed into Table I-11-a
Of the 48 new assistant professors in 2003-2004, four are at Canadian schools. Of the 44 in the US, 29 (66.0 percent) are White; ten (22.7 percent) are Asian or Pacific Islander; three (6.8 percent) are Hispanic, and two (4.5 percent) are American Indians. Their age categories are in Table I-11-b
The salaries reported for the 48 new assistant professors appointed in 2003-2004 ranged from a high of $132,218 to a low of $42,000. The mean salary for the 44 persons with an academic year appointment (which included no Canadian appointments) was $56,798 (median $57,053).
The mean salary for the 17 males with academic year appointments to the rank of assistant professor was $64,828 (median $58,500). For the 27 females appointed as assistant professors for the academic year, the mean salary was $53,522 (median $50,999).
Table I-11-c shows the mean beginning salaries for assistant professors with academic year appointments since 1994-1995. Of the 388 academic year appointments since 1994-1995, females have accounted for 216 (55.7 percent) while males have accounted for 172 (44.3 percent).
The four new fiscal year appointments at the assistant professor rank had salaries reported for them. During the past 30 years, relatively few fiscal year appointments have been made at the assistant professor level compared to the number appointed for the academic year.
Table I-12 presents the distribution of salaries of the 44 new assistant professors within $1,000 group for those with academic year appointments. The gender of the appointments within each group is also provided.
New Associate Professor and Professor
Ten new appointments were made at the associate professor rank. Six of these new appointments are male and four are female. Eight had academic year appointments. These appointments had a mean salary of $65,369 (median $65,000). Two had fiscal year appointments with a mean salary of $73,000 (median $73,000).
There were five new appointments at the rank of professor. Three persons appointed are female and two are male. These appointments had a mean salary of $88,303 (median $80,000).
New Instructor and Lecturer Salaries
There were six full-time instructors appointed during 2003-2004. Four had academic year appointments. The mean salary of these appointments was $47,921 (median $49,250).
There were four full-time lecturers appointed during 2003-2004. Two had academic year appointments. The mean salary for the academic year appointments was $53,131 (median $53,131).
Table I-13 allows one to compare 2003-2004 mean and median salaries at each rank with those of the previous year (2002-2003). For 2003-2004, a total of 781 salaries (including deans and directors) were reported.
mean and median salaries in Table I-13
are based on all salaries reported without regard to region. Further, no attempt was 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. In evaluating the
figures. Table I-13-a
shows average salaries by
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. (All 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 reporting)
shows the difference between mean salaries in the schools in the
Changes in the mean faculty salary in 2003-2004 compared to 2002-2003 at each rank are shown in Table I-14. It should be kept in mind that promotions, resignations, retirements, and new appointments in 2003‑2004 result in a persons 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 means that the improvement in salary is for the incumbents in each rank at a given time and do not reflect individual salary improvement.
Table I-14-a shows the percentage of salary changes by rank for the period 1999-2000 to 2003‑2004. In reading the 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. Male dean and director salaries exceed those of females. Male faculty salaries exceed female salaries, whether for fiscal year or academic year appointments, for all ranks with the exception of professors holding fiscal year appointments.
Schools in the United States were asked to provide ethnic data for their full-time faculty. Fifty-one schools (including two Canadian schools) responding to the survey provided the requested information. These data, for 709 of the 783 faculty members, are presented in Table I-17.
Table I-18 provides age category data for full-time faculty, by academic rank, in all 56 schools. The percentage of faculty 55 or older as of January 1, 2004 is 38.0 percent. It has been noted in earlier reports that the average age of the faculty has been increasing. While faculty 55 or older have remained at 30 to 34 percent for at least a decade, this year the percentage increased slightly for the third consecutive year. Comparisons can only be tentative given differences in base numbers resulting from incomplete reporting.
Year of Initial Appointment and Rank
56 schools responded to the request for the date of initial appointment of each
current faculty member to its full-time faculty. Of those faculty members employed on
Among the full-time faculty at the 56 schools, there were 34 promotions within the professorial ranks in 2003-2004. This compares with 20 the previous year. Table I-21 compares promotions over the past five years. Table I-21-a shows number of years as Full-Time faculty member at the time of promotion.
The number of earned doctorates held on January 1, 2004 for the faculty population of 783 reported (including Deans and Directors) was 720 (92 percent). Of the faculty members holding the doctorate, 417 (58 percent) had that degree in the library and information sciences (including information systems and technology, information transfer, and information resource management). The remaining faculty with doctorates (267) earned them in other fields. The remaining 36 doctorates, all at Syracuse, were undesignated.
Data on the number of faculty with earned doctorates is provided for the last ten years in the Table 22-a. The ratio of males and females holding the doctorate has remained approximately even throughout that period.
Table I-23 provides a listing of the disciplines other than the library and information sciences 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.
92 percent of full-time faculty at the 56 schools had completed doctoral
degrees prior to
Of the 783 full-time faculty, including deans and directors, at the 56 schools, 52.7 percent had tenure on January 1, 2004. Information on tenure for the last 10 years is reported in Table I-25. As can be seen from this table, the percentage of the total faculty who are tenured has not fluctuated noticeably over the years. The table does reveal, however, that there are now 10.9 percent fewer tenured faculty compared to a decade ago.
One school reported having a faculty that was completely-tenured in 2003-2004 (Table I-26). That figure has varied between one and six schools over the past 10 years. Four schools reported that less than 25 percent of their faculty were tenured. Twenty-nine schools have fewer than 50 percent tenured faculty while 11 schools have tenured faculties of 75 percent or higher. The following table shows the variation of tenure status among the 56 schools. The declining percentages of tenured faculty may be due to the large input of new faculty into the instructional force over the past decade.
Table I-26-a shows tenure status by academic rank and the gender of the faculty members holding that rank. It should be understood, of course, that deans and directors shown with tenure enjoy that status as faculty members, not as their schools' executive officers.
Table I-27 has been used in the past to report faculty salaries, including those for deans and directors, in salary ranges by rank. This table has been omitted again this year.
This is the twenty-fifth 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 responded to the non-confidential part of the faculty portion of the ALISE questionnaire did so with the understanding that they may be identified with the information submitted. Data from 56 schools are identified in the tables in Part II.
It is important to note that the data reported in Part II includes data from 2002-2003 or Fall 2003. The analysis that follows reports the responses to the questions as asked on the ALISE non-confidential Faculty 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 were no data to report, the absence of data is of course ambiguous. It could mean that there were 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 non-confidential faculty section of the questionnaire asked schools to indicate the type of academic 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 in Chapter 3.) 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 one of their terms the spring term or semester while others call it the 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 schools to indicate the number of full-time faculty in Fall 2003. These data also have been included in Table I-41. The 56 schools reported a total of 785 full-time faculty members for the 2003 Fall semester for an average of 14 faculty members per school. This number 785 is slightly greater than the 783 reported in Part I since Part I reports data as of January 2004 and Part II reports Fall 2003 data. The total number of full-time faculty reported for Fall 2002 was 742 with an average of 13.3 per school. None of these figures include reported vacant positions.
Adjunct, clinical, or other than full-time "regular" faculty continue to play important roles in the teaching effort of the schools. Table I-43 reports that 764 persons in these categories taught courses during the 2003 Fall term. This represents a faculty FTE of 234 which brings the total faculty force to 1,019 FTE faculty members (1,549 persons). Part-time faculty make up 23 percent of total FTE faculty strength.
Question 4 asked for the average percentage of salary improvement for full-time faculty in 2003-2004. Question 5 then asked the basis upon which improvements in faculty salaries were made. The responses to these questions are presented in Table I-45.
Among the schools that provided data on the percentage of salary improvement for 2003-2004, 12 schools indicated zero increases. In the previous year, 2002-2003, eight schools had indicated zero increases. Those reporting increases showed improvement from a low of 1.03 percent to a high of 10 percent. Fourteen schools reporting salary increases indicated that the increase was less than 3 percent. The average for the 41 schools reporting a salary increase was 3.8. The average drops to 2.9 percent when all 53 schools reporting data are included.
Table I-47 reports the results of Question 6 that asked how many full-time faculty replacements (resulting from resignations, retirements, etc.) were made during 2002-2003. Schools also were asked to indicate the rank of the individual(s) who was/were replaced and the rank of their replacement(s). In 2002-2003, a total of 54 faculty replacements were made at 30 schools.
The reports of previous years noted that it is common to replace senior faculty member who resign, retire, or otherwise leave a school with individuals at ranks lower than the ranks held by those being replaced. This practice has been common for many years. However, during 2002-2003, slightly more replacement faculty were appointed at the same rank. Thirty schools with faculty changes provided information on the rank of the person(s) departing and that of replacement(s). In 2002-2003 four replacements (7.4 percent) were at a higher rank, 27 (50 percent) at the same rank, and 23 (42.6 percent) at a lower rank.
Unfilled Faculty Positions
The seventh question on the questionnaire asked schools to indicate if there were unfilled full-time positions, for which funding was available, during Fall 2003. 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.
Table I-47-a shows that 48 unfilled full-time faculty positions existed despite the availability of funding for the positions, at 29 schools for Fall 2003. Last year's report indicated that there were also 47 similar unfilled vacancies. The explanations provided for positions vacant this year were derived from the data reported by the schools. The table indicates a wide distribution of vacancies among the ranks: assistant (17), associate (6), professor (8), undesignated (6), and open (12). Also, as in the past, the reasons for unfilled positions vary. However, the majority of the schools reporting unfilled positions indicated a somewhat even distribution between: lack of success in getting appropriate candidates and searches that 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 appear to be a factor.
Question 7 on the questionnaire seeks to identify full-time faculty positions that were temporarily unfilled in Fall 2003, but for which funding was available. Question 8, however, asks the schools to indicate whether faculty positions had actually been lost in 2002-2003. 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 required that the number of full-time faculty be reduced.
For 2002-2003 four schools reported a total loss of seven positions (Table I-47-b). This year's loss of positions is much lower than the 11 positions reported lost in 2001-2002. While some schools cannot hire new faculty due to budget constraints, it appears that several schools have actually lost the faculty lines.
New Faculty Positions
9 asked schools to indicate whether additional (new) faculty positions, with
new funding, had been created by the schools in 2002-2003. Table I-47-c,
shows that 19 schools reported a total of 44 new positions created. This represents a net gain of 37 positions
when the 7 positions noted in the previous table are factored in (North Carolina
– Chapel Hill and Oklahoma reported both lost and new positions in the same
year). Last year 19 schools reported
the creation of 37 new positions .
Schools were asked in Question 10 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 include faculty salaries and is often taken into account by applicants for faculty appointments as they compute the total compensation of an offer. Fifty-five schools reported an average percentage of approximately 27.4 percent (range 7.6 to 56.8 percent) for 2003-2004 (Table I-48). A few schools show variation in their percentages 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 this percentage.
Questions 11 and 12 of the questionnaire pertain to funding for professional travel. Question 11 asked the number of faculty, excluding the dean or director, who received travel funds in 2002-2003. Question 12 requests the total amount of funding for professional travel used by the school's faculty in 2002-2003, 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 2001‑2002, the range among the schools was from a low of $2,000 to a high of $611,581. For individual faculty members who received travel funds, the average varied from a reported low of $500 to a high of $35,975. For the same period a total of 547 faculty members were reported as having received travel funds. They shared a total of $1,682,420 in travel money amounting to an average of $3,076 per person. The mean per school for the 55 schools reporting amounts for individuals was $30,589 in 2002-2003 compared to $30,081 per school in 2001-02. It is difficult to know if these figures are meaningful since schools are not consistent as to whether or not they have included data on such expenditures as recruitment, accreditation visits, or visiting faculty. 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 those data that average expenditures for travel continues to increase slightly after a period of decrease.
The 13th question on the faculty questionnaire pertains to sabbatical leaves for faculty. A total of 29 schools granted funds for sabbatical or study leaves during 2002-2003, compared to 31 in 2001-2002. Details are provided in Table I-51. Two schools (North Carolina Central and Wisconsin-Milwaukee) indicated that no such leaves are granted at their institutions.
The final question in the faculty section of the ALISE questionnaire pertains to support staff available to the schools. The question was designed to separate data for regular, non-student support staff from data for part-time student employees of the school. Under each of these two employment categories the same group of subdivisions was used: (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:
(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.
"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.
If a full-time person divided his/her time between two or more of the above categories that individual appears in the 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 taken by this author. 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.
Table I-52 shows that the total FTE of support staff (exclusive of students) varied in Fall 2003 from a low of 1.0 to a high of 74.15 (mean: 7.56). Table I-54 provides similar information about part-time student support staff.
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 Table I-51.5. Also it appears that in some cases the number of persons rather than the FTE is being reported. An analysis of these data shows the following distribution of percentages for all schools reporting for Fall 2002 and 2003.