Timothy W. Sineath

[Editor's Note]: For a complete listing of schools that submitted data for this year's report, please click the
list of schools. To view the questionnaire used to gather data for this chapter, please click the questionnaire for Part I or Part II.

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 56 library and information science education programs accredited by the American Library Association (ALA) on January 1, 1999 and by two non-ALA programs.

Part II of the faculty section of this report has been compiled from information provided by the 56 of the ALA schools and by two 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 56 ALA-accredited schools.

Part I of the faculty section is based upon data reported by the participating schools as of January 1, 1999. Part II, however provides information that pertained to the schools during the fiscal year 1997-98 (July l, 1997 to June 30, 1998). 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 by name in the tables found in Part II.


This is the twenty-sixth 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 thirteenth 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 the 56 schools accredited by ALA on January 1, 1999. Last year 55 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, 1999.  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.  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, off-campus teaching, or other over-load compensations were also excluded.  Faculty members on sabbatical leave on January 1, 1999 are included in the analysis, although they had been omitted prior to 1987.

Faculty Size

The number of full-time faculty members at the 56 reporting schools, including deans and directors, totaled 633, up from 600.75 last year.  This represents one more school and does not include positions unfilled at the time the report was submitted.  Three schools listed a total of five positions vacated during the year and are not counted in the 633 figure. The base number used for most of the analyses that follows will be 633, 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 56 schools ranged from a low of five in four schools to a high of 27 in one school.  The average faculty size (excluding reported unfilled positions) was 11.4, which is up from last year’s figure of 11.9. The average faculty size increases to 11.38 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, 1999 among the 56 schools. This table shows that 25 (44.7 percent) of the 56 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 1998-99 is 7 with 8 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 633 full-time faculty, including the deans and directors, on January 1, 1999, in the 56 schools, 316 (47.9 percent) are males, 317 (50.1 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 was the highest of any years in the time period from 1976 to the present, and it has increased each year for the last decade. The 1998-99 figure decreased by one percent. 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 1998-99 male/female ratio of full-time faculty by rank in comparison with that of 1997-98. The table also shows the current year in contrast to that of ten years ago: 1988-1989. 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 1988-89, 46.4 percent of the faculty in all ranks (including deans and directors) were women. In 1998-99, the percentage difference has decreased to 50.1 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 1998-99 there was a slight decrease in the percentage of female to male of one point over 1997-98.

Deans and Directors

Among the 56 schools reporting, there were seven changes in appointments of executive officers between January 1, 1998 and January 1, 1999. This represents a change in leadership of 12.5 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 seven "new" deans and directors in 1998-99, there were two newly appointed in interim status. Of the five regular appointments, all are male.

Following is a list of the schools with new executive officers in 1998-99: Drexel (Dean), Emporia (Dean), Long Island (Dean), Michigan (Dean), Rhode Island (Director), Washington (Dean), Western Ontario (Dean).

The breakdown of the administrative titles of the executive officers of the 56 schools on January 1, 1999 is reported in Table I-5. This breakdown includes the acting deans or directors.

Of the 56 deans and directors (and persons holding the title of chair), including those holding acting or temporary status, 40 (71.4 percent) held the rank of professor. This is a slight decrease over 1997-98. Of the deans and directors, 35 are males (62.5 percent) and 21 (37.5 percent) are females. Sixteen held the rank of associate professor, and of these, six (37.5 percent) are males and ten (62.5 percent) are females. Fourteen (87.5 percent) of those holding the associate professor rank held tenure at the time of the report.

All 35 males who were executive officers on January 1, 1999 had earned doctorates. Of the 21 female executive officers, 20 (95.2 percent) had earned doctorates. The executive officer who did not hold the doctorate, holds at least the master's degree in library and information science.

Of the 55 doctorates held by deans and directors, 39 (70.9 percent) were in the library and information sciences. This is an increase of one 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 49 deans and directors of schools located in the US, 42 are white and seven are from minority ethnic origins, one more than the number from minority ethnic origins reported last year.  Of the seven who were from minority origins, three are Black, two are Hispanic, and two are 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 54 schools reporting age data is displayed in Table I-7 by five-year categories.  This table includes all reporting executive officers serving as of January 1, 1999, including those in an acting capacity.

This table shows that 43 (79.6 percent) of the executive officers of the 54 schools were 50 years of age or older on January 1, 1999.  This is a slightly larger percentage than the 73.3 percent of last year as well as those figures reported in the last several years. Ten (18.5 percent) of the deans and directors who held regular appointments were 60 years of age or older as of January 1, 1999. The number was 9 for last year, 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 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 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 has taken place, and as is evident from the data that 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 from program head positions will begin in a few years.


Salary figures as of January 1, 1999 were reported for 54 of the 56 deans and directors. Of the 56 respondents, Pittsburgh will not release the Dean's salary and Dalhousie reported no salary data. Of the deans and directors, 46 hold fiscal year (11 or 12 month) appointments.  Of those holding fiscal year appointments, 31 are male and 15 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 1999 twenty-two deans and directors reported salaries above $90,000.

In 1997-98, five 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.  Eight schools reported executive salaries in the range of $100,000 to $119,000.

In 1998-99, five deans and directors reported salaries of $120,000 or more with the highest being over $159,000.  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 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 $0.65 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 $159,000 to a low of $46,632. The mean salary for the 44 deans and directors with a fiscal year appointment was $95,868 (median $88,697). 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, 1999, was $94,742 (median $90,002). The mean salary for Canadian deans and directors was $88,039 (median $86,109).

An analysis of the 10 deans and directors that received their salaries on an academic year basis shows a range from a high of $146,995 to a low of $59,675. The mean for deans and directors on academic year appointments was $76,759 (median $63.534). 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, 1999 and who reported their salaries, (including acting persons), 29 are males and 15 are females. For the 29 males, the mean salary was $96,592 (median $96137). This is an increase in the mean salary of male deans and directors of $1,129, over January 1, 1998, for an increase of 1.2 percent. For the 15 female deans and directors who hold fiscal year appointments, the mean salary on January 1, 1999 was $88,564 (median $88,683), for an increase of $2,838 (3.3 percent). The mean salary increase of male deans and directors is more than that of their female counterparts. This compares with a difference of $3,839 in favor of males in 1997-98. Table I-7-c shows the mean salaries of deans and directors from 1989-90 to 1998-99.

Salary differentials have also been evident when one compares them in rank order. The gap between male and female salaries has been narrowing. In 1997-98, six of the 10 highest salaries were received by men.  The top three reported salaries were for men.  In 1998-99 four out of the 10 highest salaries are for men.  These figures are only estimates since Pittsburgh does not report the salary of its female dean.

An analysis of this table shows that for the reporting 44 deans with fiscal year appointments (including acting deans and heads of Canadian schools), the percentage of increase in the average salary shown here, was 4.6 percent, up from the increase of 1.8 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 somewhat further eroded by the difference in actual schools represented in the two years.

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, 1999, ten deans and directors had held their administrative positions for ten years or more. This represents approximately 17.8 percent of the deans. At the other end of the longevity spectrum, 24 deans and directors have been appointed to their present position since 1996, a period of only three years and 37 (66.0 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.

Assistant/Associate Deans

Meaningful data regarding the full-time faculty who assist the executive officer in administering the school is difficult to compare because major differences exist among the schools. 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 56 schools in 1998-99, 14 had full-time faculty serving as associate (assistant, etc.) deans and directors. This is lower than that reported for 1997-98. Two of the 14 schools have two or more faculty members with such appointments, for a total of seven individuals. Of the 14 associate (assistant, etc.) deans and directors in 1998-99, none were newly appointed to this post during the year under review.

In 1997-98, 11 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. This is currently included in Table I-52 as support staff.

New Faculty Appointments

Between January 1, 1998 and January 1, 1999, exclusive of deans and directors, 82 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.


The following table shows the sex of the new faculty members appointed to full-time regular positions in the various faculty ranks between January 1, 1998 and January 1, 1999.

All eight of the new appointments at the professor level received an academic year appointment. Seven had an earned doctorate; and three were granted tenure. The age categories are: one from 35-39, two from 45-49; three from 50-54; and two from 55-59.

Of the 19 new associate professors who were not deans or directors, 17 received academic year appointments and two received fiscal year appointments; all held earned doctorates: and one was granted tenure. Their age categories are: three from 30-39; seven from 40-49; and eight from 50-59.

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 45 new assistant professors appointed to permanent positions in 1998-99. This compares with 33 last year.  The total of new appointments at all ranks in 1998-99 has increased. Of the 45 new assistant professors appointed in 1998-99, 26 are male (57.7 percent) and 19 are female (42.3 percent).

Among the 45 new assistant professors, 39 had completed their doctorate by January 1999. The disciplines of the 39 new assistant professors with earned doctorates are distributed into the following fields: [Table I-11-a]

Of the 45 new assistant professors in 1998-99, three are in Canadian schools. Of those in the US, 35 are White; one is American Indian; five are Asian or Pacific Islander; three are Black; and one is Hispanic. Age categories were provided as follows: [Table I-11-b]


The 43 salaries reported for the 45 new assistant professors appointed in 1998-99 ranged from a high of $55,739 to a low of $35,000.  The mean salary for the 40 persons with an academic year appointment (which included no Canadian appointments) was $43,644 and the median was $44,902.

The mean salary for the 23 males appointed for the academic year to the rank of assistant professor in 1998-998 was $44,360 (median $45,000). For the 17 females appointed as assistant professors for the academic year, the mean salary was $42,674 (median $41,000). Contrasted with the 1997-98 difference of $6,201 in favor of males, the 1998-99 difference is $1,680 in favor of males. It should be noted that all persons appointed as assistant professors 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 1989-90. During those years, women out-distanced their male colleagues' average salary in 1989-90 and in 1991-92. In the total of 289 of academic year appointments since 1989-90, women have accounted for 176 (60.9 percent) while men have accounted for 110 (39.1 percent).

Three of the five new fiscal year appointments at the assistant professor rank reported salaries. During the past 26 years, only 93 fiscal year appointments have been made at the assistant professor level, as compared to 586 appointed for the academic year.

New Associate Professor and Professor Salaries

Nineteen new appointments were made at the associate professor rank. Fourteen are male and five are female; 18 reported salaries and all but one had academic year appointments. These academic year appointments had a mean salary of $59,498 (median $62,000).

There were also four new appointments at the rank of professor: three males and one female with academic year appointments. The mean salary was $73,814 (median $80,116).

New Instructor and Lecturer Salaries

There were five full-time instructors appointed during 1998-99 among the 56 schools. Three had academic year appointments.  The mean salary of these appointments was $64,893 (median $63,113).

There were five full-time lecturers appointed during 1998-99.  Three have academic year appointments.  The average salary for the three academic appointments was $36,334 (median $35,000).  The average salary for the fiscal year appointments was $42,792 (median $45,000).

All Faculty


Table I-13 allows one to compare 1998-99 mean and median salaries at each rank with those of a year earlier (1997-98).  Salary figures do not include Dalhousie. In addition, Pittsburgh withheld the Dean's salary; South Carolina did not provide salary data for one professor and one associate professor (both fiscal year appointments); and Oklahoma did not included data for one professor. In 1998-99, there was reported a total of 622 salaries (including deans and directors).

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.  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. 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.

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, McGill, Montréal, Toronto, Western Ontario.  (6 of 7 schools reporting)

Table I-13-b shows the difference between mean salaries in the schools in the US and those in Canada.  In evaluating these figures it is important to remember that the difference in exchange rate between the US and the Canadian dollars on January 1, 1999 was approximately $.65 US to $1.00 Canadian.

Improvements in the mean faculty salary in 1998-99 over 1997-98 at each rank are shown in Table I-14.  It should be kept in mind, however, that promotions, resignations, retirements, and new appointments in 1998-99 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 [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 professor and associate professor with fiscal year appointments. The average difference among all ranks with fiscal year appointments (excluding deans, directors, and program chairs) is $1,786 in favor of females. Academic year appointments are $2,779 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, 52 percent are female and 47.4 percent are male.

Ethnic Background

The schools in the United States were again asked to provide ethnic data for their full-time faculty. Fifty-one schools (including two Canadian schools) that responded to the survey provided the information listed in Table I-17.  This represents 481 of the 633 faculty members. Care should be taken when comparing year to year percentages because the base number of faculty varies each year.


The table that follows [Table I-18] provides age category data for the full-time faculty with academic rank in all the ALA schools. The percentage of faculty 55 or older as of January 1, 199 is 34.9 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. Comparisons can only be tentative given differences in base numbers resulting from incomplete reporting.

Year of Initial Appointment and Rank

All schools responded to the request for the date of initial appointment of each current faculty member to its full-time faculty.  For each faculty member where academic rank was reported, who were employed on January 1, 1999, nearly two-thirds (63.9 percent) of the faculty members at the reporting schools have been appointed in the last ten years (1987-88 through 1998-99).


Among the full-time faculty in the 56 schools, there were 30 promotions within the professorial ranks.  This compares with 21 last year.  Table I-21 compares the past 5 years.


The number of earned doctorates held on January 1, 1999 for the faculty population of 633 (including Deans and Directors) was 576 (90.9 percent).  This is an increase in the percentage from last year, as shown in Table I-22-a.  Of the 576 faculty members holding the doctorate, 398 (69.1 percent) had their degree in the library and information sciences (Including information systems and technology, information transfer, and information resource management); 178 faculty members had doctorates in other fields; and 20 were not designated. Table I-22-a 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 in which 183 faculty members held doctorates on January 1, 1999.  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 90.9 percent of the full-time faculty teaching in the 55 reporting schools had completed doctoral degrees prior to January 1, 1999, 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 25 schools.  Fifty-one schools (91 percent) of the reporting schools have faculties of which at least 75 percent hold the doctorate.


Of the 633 full-time faculty in the 56 ALA schools, 60.9 percent of the faculty had tenure on January 1, 1999. (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.

Four schools reported having an all-tenured faculty in 1998-99; that figure has remained between two and six schools over the last 10 years.  Only one school reported less than 25 percent tenured faculty; 10 schools have less than 50 percent; and 12 schools have tenured faculties of 75 percent or higher.  The following table [Table I-26] shows the variation among the 56 schools.

The following table shows tenure status by rank and sex 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' executive officers.

In the table that follows [Table I-27], individual faculty salaries (including those for 54 deans and directors) are reported for 55 schools. Some salaries were not reported from Dalhousie, Oklahoma and South Carolina. Pittsburgh 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 twentieth 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 ALA schools responded and are identified among the schools in tables in Part II.

It is important to note that the data reported in Part II cover 1997-98, the year previous to the salary data reported in Part I (1998-99).  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 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 previous academic year. The answers to this second question have also been included in Table 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 621.25 faculty members for the 1997 Fall semester for an average of 11.09 faculty members per school.  These figures do not include the 52 vacant positions reported for the same time period. The total reported for 1996-97, with 56 schools reporting, was 600.75 faculty for an average of 10.72 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 488 persons taught courses during the 1997 Fall term.  This represents an estimated FTE of 138, bringing the total faculty force to approximately 771 (1,121 persons). It is also interesting to note that in terms of individuals (not FTE), part-time faculty make up about 43.5 percent of the total, a decrease of 6.0 percent from last year.

Salary Improvement

Question 4 on the faculty section of the ALISE questionnaire asks for the average percentage of salary improvement for full-time faculty in 1997-98.  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 Table I-45.

Among the schools that provided data on the percentage of salary improvement, three schools reported zero increases; one has done so for the third year in a row. The improvement ranged from a low of .002 percent to a high of 8.18 percent, with an average of 3.67 percent for the 50 schools reporting an increase.  Ten schools reported increases of less than 3 percent; 14 schools reported 3 percent; and 26 reported more than 3 percent.

Faculty Replacements

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 that asks how many full-time faculty replacements (resulting from resignations, retirements, etc.) were made during 1997-98.  Schools were also asked to indicate the rank of the individual(s) who was/were replaced and the rank of the replacement(s).  In 1997-98, a total of 32 faculty replacements were made in 23 schools of which 17 were at a lower rank; 11 at the same rank; two at a higher rank; and two were undesignated.

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 1997-98.  Schools were also asked to indicate the rank and the reason the position was not filled during the year.  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, 52 unfilled full-time faculty positions are reported for 31 schools for 1997-98.  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 50 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), associate (4), professor (6) and undesignated (25). 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 continue to use vacant position salaries for alternative uses. Finally, in a few schools, unrelated, local conditions seem to be reflected.

Positions Lost

Question 7 on the questionnaire seeks to identify full-time faculty positions that were temporarily unfilled in 1997-98, but for which funding has been available.  However, Question 8 asks the schools to indicate whether faculty positions had actually been lost in 1997-98.  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 total loss of seven positions.

This year's number is the same as that of last year. The trend apparent in previous years continues to slow. 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 1997-98.  As shown in Table I-47-c, ten schools reported a total of at least 13 new positions, six more than were lost by the seven schools noted in the previous table. Last year nine schools reported 11 new positions and the previous year ten schools reported 12 new positions.  Thus, 1997-98 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. Schools reported an average percentage of approximately 27.02 percent (range of 10.10 to 56.78) for 1997-98. 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.

Professional Travel

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 1997-98. Question 12 asks for the total amount of funding for professional travel used by the school's faculty in 1997-98, 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 1997-98, the range among the schools was from a low of $1,000 to a high of $106,2242 (median: $10,580. For individual faculty members who received travel funds, the average varied from a reported low of $250 to a high of $3,123 (median: $1,396). For the same period a total of 544 faculty members were reported as having received travel funds. They shared a total of $1,142,911in travel money amounting to an average of $2,101 per person (median $10,972). The average per school for the 54 reporting amounts for individuals was $21,168 in 1997-98 as compared with $18,151 per school in 1996-97.  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.

Sabbatical Leave

The 13th question on the faculty section of the questionnaire pertains to sabbatical leaves for faculty. A total of 27 schools granted funds for sabbatical or study leaves during 1997-98, compared to 24 in 1996-97. Details are provided in Table I-51 below.  Five schools (Clark Atlanta, Illinois, Indiana, Tennessee, and Texas Woman's) indicated that no such leaves are granted at their institutions.

Support Staff

The final question in the faculty section of the ALISE questionnaire pertains to 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:

(a) Administrative Support — Secretarial and other assistance provided the dean, assistant dean, etc. in the administration of the school.
(b) Instructional Support — Clerical and other assistance provided faculty members in their course preparation and classroom teaching.
(c) Research Support — Secretarial and other support provided the faculty in their research activity.
(d) Media Services — Assistance provided by media technicians, graphic artists, and others in the production and use of non-print media.
(e) Librarian Personnel — Librarians and library assistants who serve in the library science library, whether their salaries are paid from the library school's budget or from that of the central library.
(f) Computer Lab — Those persons who work in a computer laboratory operated by the school.
(g) Other — Any support staff beyond those listed above.

If a full-time person divides his/her time between two or more of the above categories that individual appears in appropriate part-time categories.

Where obvious misinterpretations have been made by the schools, the liberty of making slight adjustments in the data supplied by them has been made. These have all involved moving fractions of staff time listed as full-time personnel where it seemed obvious that they were intended as FTE of part-time staff.

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 46.6 (mean: 5.45). 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 47.5 percent ( 195.9 Staff)
Instructional Support 10.2 percent (  42.05 Staff)
Research Support 9.2 percent (  37.83 Staff)
Media Support 1.6 percent (  6.58 Staff)
Library Personnel 11.4 percent (  47.60 Staff)
Computer Lab Personnel 13.4 percent (  55.56 Staff)
Other 6.48 percent (  26.72 Staff)

"Other" includes professional development (3 schools); marketing/public relations (5 schools); placement (2 schools); and student services, web site administrator, information technology coordinator, publications, program coordinator and computing (1 school each respectively). Some schools reported staff in more than one of these categories.

Table I-54 provides similar information about part-time student support staff.

Completed 10/25/99.
For problems with these webpages,
please contact Kathy Wisser, webmaster.

For corrections in the data,
please contact the editors, Evelyn H. Daniel or
Jerry D. Saye.