[Editor's note]: For a complete listing of schools that submitted data for this year's report, please click the list of schools.
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 chair, dean or director of 55 of the 57[*] library and information science education programs accredited by the American Library Association (ALA) on January 1, 1997.
Part II of the faculty section of this report has been compiled from information provided by 56 of the ALA schools (California - Berkeley has requested exemption from reporting for 1997/98) and by three Non-ALA 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 57 ALA-accredited schools
Part I of the faculty section is based upon data reported by the participating schools as of January 1, 1997. Part II, however provides information that pertained to the schools during the fiscal year 1996-97 (July l, 1996 to June 30, 1997). In requesting the data appearing in Part I, each dean and director 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 by name in the tables found in Part II.
This is the twenty-fifth 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 twelfth 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 officers of 55 of the 57 schools accredited by ALA on January 1, 1998. Last year 54 of 57 schools meeting this criteria reported.
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, 1998. The categories of information requested are: (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) sex; (6) highest degree earned; (7) discipline of highest degree; (8) ethnic origin (except Canadian schools); (9) age category (by 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 [questionnaire]. These categories are the same as used for the past several years.
As in the previous editions benefits were not reported as part of the salaries, and stipends for summer teaching, extension teaching, or other over-load compensations were also excluded. Faculty members on sabbatical leave on January 1, 1998 are included in the analysis, although they had been omitted prior to 1987.
Fifty-seven schools were sent questionnaires this year. California Berkeley and Western Ontario did not respond to Part I. California Berkeley did not respond to Part II. (For schools not reporting, data available from other sources was used when available and appropriate.)
The number of full-time faculty members at the 55 reporting schools, including deans and directors, totaled 600.75, up from 590.5 last year. This represents one more school and does not include positions unfilled at the time the report was submitted. Two schools listed a total of three positions vacated during the year and are not counted in the 600.75 figure. In addition, the total would increase to 624.75 if California - Berkeley and Western Ontario (based on 1996-97 figures) were added. Although 624.75 is probably as accurate count of faculty, the base number used for most of the analyses that follows will be 600.75, since this figure is the total of the faculty of the reporting schools. The base number for some analyses may be less depending on the number of persons reported in a given category of the questionnaire. The number of full-time faculty in the 55 schools ranged from a low of five in three schools to a high of 29 in one school. The average faculty size (excluding reported unfilled positions) was 10.9 which is the same as last years figure. The average faculty size increases to 11 if vacant funded positions are included. Average faculty size has varied very little in the last decade as shown in Table I-1
Table I-2 shows the variation in the number of full-time faculty on January 1, 1998 among the 55 schools reporting. This table shows that 22 (40 percent) of the 55 schools had full-time faculties of nine or fewer persons, including the dean or director. The most common faculty size (i.e., the size of the largest number of schools) in 1997-98 is 11 with 7 schools reporting faculty of this size. However, Table I-2 shows a wide range in the number of schools among the sizes indicated.
Of the 600.75 full-time faculty, including the deans and directors, on January 1, 1998, in the 55 reporting schools, 294.25 (48.9 percent) are males, 306.5 (51.1 percent) are females. An examination of Table I-3 shows that although this is virtually the same ratio as in 1996, there has again been a slight increase in the percentage of female faculty members. The 1997-98 ratio of female to male faculty members is now the highest of any years in the time period from 1976 to the present, and it has increased each year for the last decade. Nevertheless, the ratio has changed very little during the entire time period. In terms of the total number of faculty, a nearly 1:1 ratio of males and females exists.
Table 1-4 reports the 1997-98 male/female ratio of full-time faculty by rank in comparison with that of 1996-97. The table also shows the current year in contrast to that of ten years ago: 1987-1988. 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 1987-88, 46.6 percent of the faculty in all ranks (including deans and directors) were women. In 1997-98, the percentage difference has increased to 51.2 percent. 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 level. In 1997-98 there was an increase in the percentage of female to male of one point over 1996-97.
Deans and Directors
Among the 55 schools reporting, there were nine changes in appointments of executive officers between January 1, 1997 and January 1, 1998. This represents a change in leadership of 15.8 percent. A review of the number of changes in the past few years shows changes from 1980 to the present with a low of 5 changes in a year to a high of 15.
Of the nine "new" deans and directors in 1997-98, there were no newly appointed in acting or interim status. Of the nine regular appointments, four are male and five are female.
Following is a list of the schools with new executive officers in 1997-98: Alabama (Director), Albany (Dean), Alberta (Director), California Los Angeles (Chair), Dominican (Dean), Kentucky (Director), Missouri (Director), San Jose (Director), and Wisconsin Madison (Director).
The breakdown of the administrative titles of the executive officers of the 57 schools on January 1, 1998 is reported in Table I-5. This breakdown includes the acting deans or directors.
Of the 57 deans and directors (and persons holding the title of chair), including those holding acting or temporary status, 41 (71.9 percent) held the rank of professor. This is an decrease of 6.2 percent over 1996-97. Of the deans and directors, 36 are males (63.1 percent) and 21 (36.9 percent) are females. Sixteen held the rank of associate professor, and of these, seven (43.6 percent) are males and seven (56.2 percent) are females. Fourteen (87.5 percent) of those holding the associate professor rank held tenure at the time of the report.
Of the 36 males who were executive officers on January 1, 1998, 36 (100 percent) had earned doctorates. Of the 21 female executive officers, 19 (90.4 percent) had earned doctorates. The executive officers who did not hold the doctorate, holds at least the master's degree in library and information science.
Considering the entire population of deans and directors of schools on January 1, 1998, 55 (96.5 percent) had an earned doctorate. This percentage has varied little over the last several years.
Of the 55 doctorates held by deans and directors, 38 (69 percent) were in the library and information sciences. This is a increase of five in the actual number from last year. Three of the new deans (including interim) hold doctorates in fields other than the library and information sciences.
Table I-6 shows the disciplines of the doctorates held by the deans and directors of the schools.
US Schools were asked to indicate the ethnic origin of deans and directors. Of the 50 deans and directors of schools located in the US, 44 are white and six are from minority ethnic origins, one less than the number from minority ethnic origins reported last year. Of the six who were from minority origins, three are Black, two are Hispanic, and one is Asian or Pacific Islander.
Schools were asked to report the ages of the faculty and the deans and directors. This information for heads of the 57 schools is displayed in Table I-7 by five-year categories. This table includes all reporting executive officers serving as of January 1, 1998, including those in an acting capacity.
This table shows that 42 (73.3 percent) of the executive officers of the 57 schools were 50 years of age or older on January 1, 1998. This is a larger percentage than the 59.6 percent of last year as well as those figures reported in the last several years. Nine (15.8 percent) of the deans and directors who held regular appointments were 60 years of age or older as of January 1, 1998. The number was 12 for last year (21.0 percent), but has varied little over recent years. When acting or temporary appointments are excluded little difference in the relative percentages in the age group occurs. (Table I-7-a that has reported ages of only permanent heads is, then unnecessary and is being omitted again from this edition of the report.)
Table I-7-b shows this distribution by gender and indicates that the number of male deans and directors 60 years of age or older is one 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 most 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. This wave of retirements had taken place, and as is evident from the data in Tables I-7 and I-7-b, this category has slightly decreased. The number of deans and directors that are in the 50-54 and 55-59 age categories may indicate that another wave of retirements will begin in a few years.
Salary figures as of January 1, 1998 were reported for 54 of the 57 deans and directors. California Berkeley and Western Ontario did not respond to the survey. Of the 55 respondents, Pittsburgh will not release the Dean's salary. Of the deans and directors, 47 hold fiscal year (11 or 12 month) appointments. Of those holding fiscal year appointments, 30 are male and 17 are female. Four females and six males hold academic year appointments.
In 1988, 5 deans and directors reported salaries in excess of $90,000, with the highest being $110,400. For 1998 twenty-two deans and directors reported salaries above $70,000 - a 29 percent increase in this number over 1988; four were in Canadian schools.
In 1996-97, six deans and directors reported salaries of $120,000 or more with the highest being over $180,000. All in this category are in US schools. Ten schools reported executive salaries in the range of $100,000 to $117,000
In 1997-98, five deans and directors reported salaries of $120,000 or more with the highest being over $187,000. All in this category are in US schools. Eight schools reported executive salaries in the range of $100,000 to $119,000. As has been noted, salary differences are influenced in part by rank.
In previous years, the issue of the difference between salaries paid in 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 $0.74 US to $1.00 Canadian. 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 US 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 44 deans and directors reporting fiscal year salaries (including those in an acting capacity) ranged from a high of over $187,000 to a low of $47,000. The mean salary for the 44 deans and directors with a fiscal year appointment was $91,638 (median $84,453). Eliminating the deans and directors of the six reporting Canadian schools (fiscal year) from the analysis, the mean salary of the remaining 38 deans and directors of US schools who had fiscal year appointments on January 1, 1998, was $93,672 (median $85,057). The mean salary for Canadian deans and directors was $77,753 (median $80,729).
An analysis of the 9 deans and directors that received their salaries on an academic year basis shows a range from a high of $139,995 to a low of $47,400. The mean for deans and directors on academic year appointments was $68,678 (median $59,620). All of the reported academic year salaries were in US schools.
Of the 44 deans and directors who had fiscal year appointments on January 1, 1998 and who reported their salaries, (including acting persons), 28 are males and 16 are females. For the 28 males, the mean salary was $95,008 (median $85,460). This is an increase in the mean salary of male deans and directors of $3,669, above January 1, 1997, for an increase of 4.0 percent. For the 16 female deans and directors who hold fiscal year appointments, the mean salary on January 1, 1998 was $85,726 (median $82,760), for an decrease of $1,708 (2.0 percent). The mean salary increase of male deans and directors is $9,282 more than that of their female counterparts. This increase compares with a difference in favor of males of $3,839 last year, a difference of $3,839 in favor of males in 1996-97. The five year average (1993-94 to 1997-98) salary differential is $5,234. Table I-7-c shows the mean salaries of deans and directors from 1988-89 to 1997-98.
Salary differentials have also been evident when one compares them in rank order. The gap between male and female salaries has been narrowing. In 1996-97, four of the 10 highest salaries are received by men. The top three reported salaries are for men. In 1997-98 six out of the 10 highest salaries are for men. This figure is only an estimate since Pittsburgh does not report the salary of its female dean.
An analysis of this table shows that for the reporting 47 deans with fiscal year appointments (including acting deans and heads of Canadian schools), the percentage of increase in the average salary shown here, was 1.8 percent, up from the increase of .7 percent last year. However, this figure is not meaningful because of changes in the actual persons holding deanships from year to year. The percentages indicate only the approximate salary improvements for the positions of deans and directors rather than improvements for individuals. The meaning of this increase is further eroded by the difference in actual schools represented in the two years.
Table I-8 indicates the length of administrative service of the 55 deans and directors with regular and acting appointments in the schools where they presently serve. As the table shows, on January 1, 1998, 9 deans and directors had held their administrative positions for ten years or more. This represents approximately 15.8 percent of the deans. At the other end of the longevity spectrum, 25 deans and directors have been appointed to their present position since 1995, a period of only three years and 36 (63.2 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 the full-time faculty who assist the executive officer in administering the school is difficult to compare because major differences exist from one school to another. In most instances these faculty members carry out the administrative responsibilities, but have reduced teaching loads. However, some 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 have administrative roles are included. Of the 55 schools that reported for 1997-98, 11 had full-time faculty serving as associate (assistant, etc.) deans and directors (Table I-9). This is the same as reported for 1996-97. Two of the 11 schools have two or more faculty members with such appointments, for a total of 5 individuals. Of the 16 associate (assistant, etc.) deans and directors in 1997-98, none were newly appointed to this post during the year under review.
In 1996-97, 16 (of 55) schools had such positions. In 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 full-time associate or assistant deans (directors, etc.) has decreased.
It should be noted that this report includes only full-time faculty members serving in positions as associate or assistant deans (directors, etc.). A number of schools have individuals (support staff), other than full-time faculty, who serve as administrative assistants to the dean or director.
New Faculty Appointments
Between January 1, 1997 and January 1, 1998, exclusive of deans and directors, 52 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 in the total full-time faculty count.
Table I-11 shows the sex of the new faculty members appointed to full-time regular positions in the various faculty ranks between January 1, 1997 and January 1, 1998.
All four of the new appointments at the professor level received an academic year appointment. Three had an earned doctorate; and 2 were granted tenure. The age categories are: 2 from 55-59, one from 60-64, and one undesignated.
Of the six new associate professors who were not deans or directors, all received academic year appointments; all held earned doctorates: and one was granted tenure. Their age categories are: 2 from 40-44; one each from 45-49, 50-54, and 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 33 new assistant professors appointed to permanent positions in 1997-98. This compares with 31 last year. The total of new appointments at all ranks in 1997-98 has increased. Of the 33 new assistant professors appointed in 1997-98, 15 are male (45.5 percent) and 18 are female (54.5 percent).
Among the 33 new assistant professors, 31 had completed their doctorates by January 1998. The disciplines of the 31 new assistant professors with earned doctorates are displayed in Table I-11-a.
Of the 33 new assistant professors in 1997-98, three are in Canadian schools. Of those in the US, 24 are White; five are Asian or Pacific Islander; and one is Hispanic. Age categories are provided in Table I-11-b.
Salaries reported for the 33 new assistant professors appointed in 1997-98 ranged from a high of $60,000 to a low of $27,000. The mean salary for the 28 persons with an academic year appointment (which included no Canadian appointments) was $42,513 and the median was $41,900.
The mean salary for the 12 males appointed for the academic year to the rank of assistant professor in 1997-98 was $46,056 (median $41,000). For the 16 females appointed as assistant professors for the academic year, the mean salary was $39,855 (median $38,500). Contrasted with the 1996-97 difference of $3,719 in favor of males, the 1997-98 difference is $6,201 in favor of males. It should be noted that all persons appointed who did not have a doctoral degree were female.
Table I-11-c shows the mean beginning salaries for assistant professors with academic year appointments since 1988-89. During those years, women out-distanced their male colleagues' average salary in 1989-90 and in 1991-92. In the total of 279 of academic year appointments since 1988-89, women have accounted for 179 (64.2 percent) while men have accounted for 100 (35.9 percent).
There were five new fiscal year appointments at the assistant professor rank. During the past 25 years, only 87 fiscal year appointments have been made at the assistant professor level, as compared to 546 appointed for the academic year.
The distribution of salaries for new assistnat professors is provided in Table I-12.
New Associate and Professor Salaries
Six new appointments were made at the associate professor rank. All are male and all had academic year appointments. These appointments had a mean salary of $60,309 (median $46,500).
There were also four new appointments at the rank of professor: three males and one female with academic year appointments. The mean salary was $71,601 (median $72,002).
There were four full-time instructors appointed during 1997-98 among the 55 reporting schools. Seven had academic year appointments. The mean salary of these appointments was $28,000 (median $26,000).
There were six full-time lecturers appointed during 1997-98 among the 55 reporting schools. Four are female and two are male; all have academic year appointments. The average salary for the three academic appointments was $34,833 (median $36,000). The average salary for these appointments was $36,906 (median $35,500).
Table I-13 allows one to compare 1997-98 mean and median salaries at each rank with those of a year earlier (1996-97). Salary figures do not include California Berkeley or Western Ontario. In addition, Pittsburgh and Wisconsin - Milwaukee withheld the Dean's Salary; and South Carolina did not provide salary data for one professor and one associate professor (both fiscal year appointments). 1997-98, a total of 596 salaries (including deans and directors) are repeated.
The mean and median salaries shown 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. Since Canadian university salaries are often higher than those in the US, and there are geographical differences in the US as well, Table I-13-a is intended to show average salaries by region and for Canadian schools. The regions are those used by ALA's Committee on Accreditation. As noted above, California Berkeley and Western Ontario are not included in their respective regions because salaries were not provided. 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 individuals to whom the salaries apply.
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, 1998 was approximately $.74 US to $1.00 Canadian.
Improvements in the mean faculty salary in 1997-98 over 1996-97 at each rank are shown in Table I-14. It should be kept in mind, however, that promotions, resignations, retirements, and new appointments in 1997-98 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 Table I-14-a, 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 salaries exceed female salaries in all ranks except associate professor (fiscal year) and assistant professor (academic year) in both fiscal and academic appointments. The amount of difference of males over females is $856 for professors (academic year) and $5,620 (fiscal year). The average difference among all ranks with fiscal year appointments is $4,823 in favor of male. Academic year appointments are $755 in favor of male salaries. To the degree that having an earned doctorate influences initial salaries at these ranks, it may be worth noting that of the faculty without the doctorate, 56 percent are female and 44 percent are male.
The schools in the United States were again asked to provide ethnic data for their full-time faculty. Forty-seven schools that responded to the survey provided the information listed in Table I-17. Information on the deans and directors is from 48 schools. This represents 547 of the 604 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 the full-time faculty with academic rank in all the ALA schools except California Berkeley and Western Ontario. The percentage of faculty 55 or older as of January 1, 1998 is 31.7 percent. It has been noted in earlier reports that the average age of the faculty has been increasing. However, the range of faculty 55 or older has remained at 30 to 34 percent for at least a decade. As noted above, comparisons can only be tentative given differences in base numbers resulting from incomplete reporting.
Year of Initial Appointment and Rank
Of the reporting schools 54 responded to the request for the date of initial appointment of each current faculty member to its full-time faculty. For each faculty member where academic rank was reported, who were employed on January 1, 1997, nearly two-thirds (60.13 percent) of the faculty members at the reporting schools have been appointed in the last ten years (1986-87 through 1996-97).
Among the full-time faculty in the 55 schools participating in the 1997-98 survey, there were 21 promotions within the professorial ranks. This compares with 35 last year. Table I-21 compares the past 5 years. Also, Table I-21-a shows the number of years as full-time faculty members in their respective schools of the individuals promoted.
The number of earned doctorates held on January 1, 1998 for the faculty population of 604 (including Deans and Directors) was 530 (87.7 percent). This is a slight decrease in the percentage from last year, as shown in Table I-22a. Of the 530 faculty members holding the doctorate, 347 (65.5 percent) had their degree in the library and information sciences (Including information systems and technology, information transfer, and information resource management); 183 faculty members had doctorates in other fields; and 19 were not designated. Table I-22a indicates the percentage of faculty members, by gender, holding doctorates.
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 the library and information sciences and technologies in which 183 faculty members held doctorates on January 1, 1998. While deans were asked to be precise in identifying these disciplines as they completed the questionnaire, the responses often were not clear, and the 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 87.7 percent of the full-time faculty teaching in 55 ALA schools had completed doctoral degrees prior to January 1, 1998, the percentage of faculty within individual schools holding the doctorate varied considerably, from a low of 50 percent at one school to a high of 100 percent at 24 schools. Forty-nine schools (89 percent) of the reporting schools have faculties of which at least 75 percent hold the doctorate (Table I-24).
Of the 604 full-time faculty in the 55 ALA schools that reported on their faculty, 61.8 percent of the faculty had tenure on January 1, 1998. (Those with "security of appointment" have been included in the count). 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 over these years.
Two schools reported having an all-tenured faculty in 1997-98; that figure has remained between two and six schools over the last 10 years. Only one school reported less than 25 percent tenured faculty; 20 schools have less than 50 percent; and 16 schools have tenured faculties of 75 percent or higher. Table I-26 shows the variation among the 55 schools that reported tenure data.
Table I-26-a shows tenure status by rank and sex of the faculty members holding that academic rank and included in this study. It should be understood, of course, that deans and directors shown with tenure enjoy that tenure as faculty members, not as their schools' executive officers.
In Table I-27, individual faculty salaries (including those for 54 deans and directors) were reported by 55 schools. California Berkeley and Western Ontario did not report, and some salaries were not reported from Clark Atlanta and South Carolina. Pittsburgh and Wisconsin-Milwaukee did not report the salary of the Dean. The salaries are distributed by rank in increments of $1,000 (except where there are large gaps between salaries). The salaries for deans and directors and for associate (assistant, etc.) professors have been entered according to their faculty ranks.
This is the nineteenth 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 understanding that the writer would not link specific data with any single school. However, schools that respond to the ALISE questionnaire, leading to the information reported in Part II, do so with the understanding that they will be identified with the information that they submit. A total of 56 of the 56 schools responded and are identified among the ALA schools in tables in Part II.
It is important to note that the data reported in Part II cover 1996-97, the year previous to the salary data reported in Part I (1997-98). This means that frequently the data will not be in agreement for a given school for the two time periods. However, the data are taken from the forms as reported by the schools.
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 did not respond to the question.
Academic Calendar and Full-Time Faculty
The first question in the faculty section of the ALISE questionnaire asks schools to indicate the type of calendar in use (i.e., semester, quarter, trimester, etc.) These responses are reported in Tables 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 previous academic year. The answers to this second question have also been included in Tables I-41. The full-time faculty data reported here are for the academic year prior to that reported in Part I. The 56 schools report a total of 600.75 faculty members for the 1996 Fall semester for an average of 10.72 faculty members per school. These figures do not include the 43 vacant positions reported for the same time period. The total reported for 1995-96, with 53 schools reporting, was 502 faculty for an average of 10.75 per school.
Adjunct, clinical, or other than full-time "regular" faculty are playing increasingly important roles in the teaching effort of the schools. The information reported in Table I-43 indicates that 511 persons taught courses during the 1996 Fall term in 56 schools. This represents an estimated FTE of 168, bringing the total faculty force to approximately 768.75 (1,112 persons). It is also interesting to note that in terms of individuals (not FTE), part-time faculty make up about 49.5 percent of the total.
Question 4 on the faculty section of the ALISE questionnaire asks for the average percentage of salary improvement for full-time faculty in 1996-97. This was followed by Question 5, which asked the basis on which improvements in faculty salaries were made. The responses to these questions have been tabulated in Tables I-45 and I-46 respectively.
Among the schools that provided data on the percentage of salary improvement, all seven schools reported zero increases; two have done so for the second year in a row. The improvement ranged from a low of .04 percent to a high of 12.2 percent, with an average of 3.95 percent for the 47 schools reporting an increase. Eight schools reported increases of less than 3 percent and; eight schools reported 3 percent; and 18 reported more than 3 percent.
The reports of previous years note that it is common to replace senior faculty members who retire, resign, or otherwise leave, with individuals at lower ranks than had been held by those being replaced. This practice has been followed for many years. As funding becomes more limited, and the need to change the overall makeup of the faculty, there is strong motivation for its continuation. Question 6 on the questionnaire was designed to provide specific data to demonstrate whether or not this has happened. Table I-47 reports the results of Question 6 which asks how many full-time faculty replacements (resulting from resignations, retirements, etc.) were made during 1996-97. Schools were also asked to indicate the rank of the individual(s) who was/were replaced and the rank of the replacement(s). In 1996-97 a total of 30 faculty replacements were made in 22 schools of which 19 were at a lower rank; eight at the same rank; and three at a higher rank.
Unfilled Faculty Positions
The seventh question on the questionnaire asks schools to indicate if there were unfilled, full-time positions, for which funding was available, during 1996-97. Schools were also asked to indicate the rank and the reason the position was not filled during 1996-97. The intent of this question is to identify the total number of full-time unfilled faculty positions in the schools. 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, 50 unfilled full-time faculty positions are reported for 29 schools for 1996-97. The explanations for these vacancies have been given from the data reported by the schools to indicate the reasons the positions are vacant. Last year's report indicated that there were 43 vacancies despite the availability of funding for the positions. The explanations provided by the schools indicate that slightly more unfilled openings are, as in the past, at the rank of assistant professor. However, a wide distribution of vacancies among the ranks was reported: assistant (17.5), associate (7), professor (8) and undesignated (14.5). 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 three reasons: budget constraints, including freezes or lack of sufficient salaries to adequately fund positions; lack of success in getting appropriate candidates; or that searches were in progress or completed. A few schools chose to use vacant position salaries for alternative uses. Finally, in a few schools, unrelated, local conditions may be reflected.
Question 7 on the questionnaire seeks to identify full-time faculty positions that were temporarily unfilled in 1996-97, but for which funding has been available. However, Question 8 asks the schools to indicate whether faculty positions had actually been lost in 1996-97. 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. Six schools reported a loss of seven positions (Table I-47-b).
This year's number is down up from the level of last year. The trend apparent in previous years has slowed. While a number of schools cannot hire new faculty due to budget constraints fewer have actually lost the faculty line, than had been the case in recent years.
New Faculty Positions
Question 9 on the questionnaire asks schools whether additional (new) faculty positions, with new funding, had been created in the schools in 1996-97. As shown in Table I-47-c, nine schools reported a total of at least 11 new positions, five more than were lost by the six schools noted in the previous table. Last year 10 schools reported 12 new positions and the previous year nine schools reported 13 new positions. Thus, 1996-97 new positions are similar in number to those of the previous few years.
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 the actual salaries paid. This percentage is often required in making grant proposals that will include faculty salaries, and it is often taken into account by applicants for faculty appointments as they compute the total compensation that an offer includes. As shown in Table I-48, schools reported an average percentage of approximately 25.6 percent (range of 10 to 45) for 1996-97. A few schools show variation in the percentage over the last five years. A few schools reported an increases, and a few schools reported a decrease for the same period. It may be that the variations 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 asks for the number of faculty, including the dean or director, who received travel funds in 1996-97. Question 12 asks for the total amount of funding for professional travel used by the school's faculty in 1996-97, 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 1996-97, the range among the 51 schools that reported having travel funds, was from a low of $500 to a high of $110,125 (median: $12,844. For individual faculty members who received travel funds, the average varied from a reported low of $250 to a high of $4,913 (median: $1,475). For the same period a total of 534 faculty members were reported as having received travel funds. They shared a total of $925,034 in travel money amounting to an average of $1,734 per person. The average per school for the 51 reporting amounts for individuals was $18,151 in 1996-97 as compared with $15,944 per school in 1995-96. 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 have 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 24 schools granted funds for sabbatical or study leaves during 1996-97, compared to 28 in 1995-96. Details are provided in Table I-51 below. Two schools (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 for 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 for each subdivision:
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.
As shown in Table I-52, the total FTE of support staff (exclusive of students) varied from a low of 1.0 to a high of 47.125 (mean: 7.0). 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.
"Other" includes professional development (3 schools); marketing/public relations (4 schools); placement (3 schools); conservation/preservation labs (2 schools); and publications, program coordinators, information technology coordinator, advising, and distance education (1 school each respectively).
Table I-54 provides similar information about part-time student support staff.